Mark, You could use relationships in repositories that support it to associate documents with N notes. For repositories that don't support it, a note could be a cmis:document and you could track cmis:objectId's of notes in a multi-value property on the cmis:document (more likely a child type of cmis:document) instances related to those notes.
Does that make sense or am I missing your intent? Jeff On Aug 31, 2012, at 10:45 AM, Mark Streit wrote: > I have seen a few threads on a similar topic so pardon if this is > duplicated. > > First off, I know that this is completely dependent on the ECM product > supporting this. 2 ECM products are being considered - SharePoint 2010 (or > possibly 2013) and Alfresco 4 > > Second this an all Java implementation from the client side. Here is the > scenario. > > We can currently add properties to *cmis:Document* .... let's say for > simplicity, we add: > > categoryCode, type=String > subCategoryCode, type=String > displayName, type=String > employeeID, type=String > > > This works fine in both products - in one case, AF4, you extend the model > with an XML configuration file whereas in Sharepoint, you can use the > Library Admin page to add fields of various types to the current document > model. So far, so good. > > Now, we have a use case, where we need these same 4 properties, PLUS a > List<UserNote> where: > > UserNote: > > id, type=long > date, type=Calendar > noteText, type=String > > > As I see it we have to 1) define the UserNote object in the ECM backend > somehow and 2) add this List<UserNote> property to the cmis:Document. What > they are looking to do is to keep the history of these notes made by the > user on this Document whenever they retrieve it to edit, etc. Not trying > to reproduce version control as much as attaching these ad-hoc notes > managed on the Document. > > My 2 questions are: > > > - Can the CMIS APIs support this use case? > - If so, can anyone suggest an example or point to document showing > something similar to this? > > > Thanks in advance for any insight or suggestions. > > -- > Mark > * *
