It would surely be consistent to allow metadata for both binary and xml resources.
On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 4:45 PM, Marc van Grootel <[email protected]> wrote: > ... was thinking if these metadata nodes would also exist for binary > database resources or only for xml documents and collections. > > Cheers, > --Marc > > On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 2:24 PM, Marc van Grootel > <[email protected]> wrote: >> Hi Christian, >> >> With nodes I meant database "nodes". E.g. a database == collection == >> collection node and a document == document node. I wasn't talking >> about nodes within a document. I don't think the latter is as valuable >> as the former. For myself I compare this a bit to the metadata saved >> in a CMS where folders and documents can get metadata for organizing >> the documents and being able to locate/find things based on more than >> just the path or collection name. >> >> Yes, I think strings for keys and values is sufficient. >> >> Regarding keys in maps, I would've like to be able to have QNames as >> map keys but sadly this is not allowed. >> >> --Marc >> >> >> On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 1:03 PM, Christian Grün >> <[email protected]> wrote: >>> Hi Marc, >>> >>>> Why do you hesitate about adding API access to such data? Is that a >>>> technical/complexity or more a design concern? >>> >>> One of the reasons is that we have quite a lot of different APIs, and >>> it takes quite some time to provide new features in more than one API >>> (which is often a user request if a feature turns out to be >>> successful). This is why we tend to include new features either via >>> BaseX commands or directly in XQuery, or in both. >>> >>> Maybe we could provide additional commands and add XQuery >>> functionality in a second step. >>> >>> Some more questions: >>> >>>> [...] where one, system >>>> (not an XQuery app) needs to manipulate information on nodes as well >>>> as nodes themselves that can then be used in an XQuery app. >>> >>> * Do you refer to document nodes, or nodes in general? In the latter >>> case, we could also think about binding properties to node ids. >>> >>> * Would it be sufficient to use strings for keys and values? >>> >>> Christian >> >> >> >> -- >> --Marc > > > > -- > --Marc
