> > > ...nevertheless, if someone creates a patch to support an XML > > > > default rendering (with tests) I guess we' accept it. > > sure. the problem is that anything else than JCR docview or JCR system > > > view does not make sense.... > > Agreed, and that's also easy to implement I guess, using the JCR > Session.export*View methods (am I being subtle enough in suggesting > that someone could send a patch for that? ;-) not that easy. the problem is that the 'depth' information cannot easily be included. so you need to provide some proxy ContentHandler that supreses elements deeper than the specified level.
> > ...i suggest the following syntax: > > > > > <path>.<level>.<type>.xml > > where level is the depth of the export, and type is either 'docview' > > > or 'sysview' with 'sysview' as default.... > > Agree with that. -- toby
