Gregor J. Rothfuss schrieb:
J. Wolfgang Kaltz wrote:
access it via the LenyaMetaData. This generic "metadata = simple
attributes" approach does, I agree, imply that arbitrary, nested XML
is not possible within the metadata. So the decisive question is, do
we really need such XML within the metadata ? (IMO no)
i also think that the answer tends to be no, which in turn means it is a
piece of cake to make these attributes into jcr properties
If we distinguish metadata attributes to be handled by different
components according to a namespace, do you know if that could be a
problem for JCR mapping ?
IIUC a JCR Node has a list of properties via the Property type; these
don't have an explicit concept of namespace, but according to the example
N.getProperties("jcr:* | myapp:name | my doc")
it looks like one can use the namespace in the parameter "namePattern" ?
If that works, it would definitely be a +1 for the solution "distinguish
metadata from different components by using different namespaces"
(...)
Any issues other than getting current meta attributes about a document
should not be handled via the MetaData interfaces.
explain?
I meant issues such as workflow history, but we agree on that, so no
problem there.
--
Wolfgang
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
