chemistry-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Florian Müller <f...@apache.org>
Subject Re: extensions vs bindings
Date Thu, 25 Oct 2012 18:51:59 GMT
 Hi Michael,

 Non-standard URL parameters are not exposed in the Java API. There was 
 no demand for that so far.
 If you have a use case, please open an issue [1].


 Florian


 [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CMIS


> Hi,
>
> Yes, i am talking about what maps to ExtensionsData in java.
>
> Are the non-standard url parameters exposed in the java API?
>
> It would be nice if they could be mapped to ExtensionsData.
> Then following certain restrictions extensions could work the same 
> for
> all bindings.
> There is a hint of that in CmisExtensionElement:
> "Try to avoid attributes because they are binding specific!"
>
> Michael
>
> On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 5:53 PM, Florian Müller <fmui@apache.org> 
> wrote:
>> Hi Michael,
>>
>> The term "extensions" is a bit overloaded in CMIS. I guess you are 
>> talking
>> about the extension parameter that some CMIS operation have.
>> This parameter can only be set via the Web Service binding.
>>
>> This extension parameter was introduced to compensate the fact that 
>> you can
>> add additional, non-standard parameters to AtomPub URLs, which is 
>> not
>> possible with Web Services.
>>
>>
>> Florian
>>
>>
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Extensions only seem to work for the webservices binding and not 
>>> for
>>> atom or browser bindings.
>>> I don't immediately find extensions for atom or browser bindings in 
>>> the
>>> spec.
>>> Can someone confirm this? Or am I missing something?
>>>
>>> Michael
>>
>>


Mime
View raw message