On Tue, Jul 3, 2012 at 11:06 AM, Jukka Zitting <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > On Tue, Jul 3, 2012 at 10:55 AM, Bart van der Schans > <[email protected]> wrote: >> We running into a (potential) issue with same name siblings and >> authorization and I would like to have some feedback before we try to >> fix this (if needed at all). > > Your problem boils down to having "same name siblings" and > "authorization" in the same sentence, or perhaps even having same name > siblings in the first place. You're probably better off if you try to > avoid the SNS feature entirely.
We are very aware of this, but unfortunately we are dealing with a bit of legacy here :-( >> Which is a bit odd, because how can the session know there is more >> than one item sibling? Does anybody knows what the spec has to say >> about this? > > The spec leaves this open by explicitly allowing access control to > leave gaps in the SNS sequence. It's not an elegant solution, but > AFAIUI nobody really considered such interactions when the SNS feature > was specified (IIUC it came up just as a logical consequence of the > XML import feature). Ah, thanks Jukka and Stefan for the quick replies. So the "compacts indices" mode for SNS is also allowed (as stated in paragraph $22.5), but I suspect that may take quite some effort to implement this in the current code base. And even then it probably will come at the cost of some performance. Regards, Bart
