Hi,
On 4/24/07, Julian Reschke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Jukka Zitting wrote:
> A value record would essentially be an array of bytes as defined in
> Value.getStream(). In other words the integer value 123 and the string
> value "123" would both be stored in the same value record. More
> specific typing information would be indicated in the property record
> that refers to that value. For example an integer property and a
> string property could both point to the same value record, but have
> different property types that indicate the default interpretation of
> the value.
This is possible, but does it really help in the real world? Thus I'd
see that just as a nice-to-have, and be prepared to take it out if it
makes things harder in practice...
I guess this decision is mostly a nice-to-have, it simplifies some
value conversions and might help with indexing but most importantly
keeps the value records simple as they are essentially just untyped
byte arrays. I wouldn't mind adding type information if there's a good
reason to do that.
BR,
Jukka Zitting
