Joern Nettingsmeier schrieb: [...]
>>> andreas, where should the actual saving be implemented? my gut feeling >>> says that our editor code should just throw an xml tree somewhere and >>> not be concerned with file operations or streams. >> >> What do you mean with "throw somewhere"? > > sorry for the sloppy language. i mean that an editor handler should not > be concerned with the gory details of storing the edited document. all > it should have to do is pass the final, validated and post-processed XML > DOM tree to someone who takes care of it. I guess the problem boils down to "pass". Is it possible to find a least common denominator here? What options are there? - PUT request - POST request parameter (text) - POST request parameter (application/x-www-form-urlencoded) - ... > that means that the saveXML method should vanish from > FooEditorUsecase.java altogether. the question is: who will do the job? > what is the correct method of saving a previously checked-out document? The EditDocument usecase offers the service of saving the document. You have to provide the source, e.g. a temporary file, a StreamGenerator pipeline etc. > and while we're at it: what is the correct way of checking out a > document? we currently have an action to do that, but i think it's quite > unintuitive to do the checkout in a sitemap, and almost everything else > in a usecase handler. - set the transaction policy of the usecase to "pessimistic" - return the document's repository node in getNodesToLock() -- Andreas --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
