chemistry-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Sutter, Peter" <peter.sut...@sap.com>
Subject Re: ObjectiveCMIS browser binding comments
Date Fri, 18 Apr 2014 11:01:12 GMT
Hi Gavin,

thanks for your feedback. Yes those constants should be move to the
CMISBroserConstants header file.

Yup there should be rather a browser binding subclass for the
RepositoryInfo that holds those two properties. I will do that (or will
remove it as those properties are currently not used).

In fact when I started with the browser binding implementation I have used
the UriBuilder classes where possible but I had to extend them for other
properties like succinct and so on but I could not reuse those classes for
all the methods so I went for the CMISURLUtil which is now used consistent
in all methods.

Same here in germany with the public holidays, so happy easter holidays :)

Best regards,
Peter



On 4/18/14, 12:02 AM, "Gavin Cornwell" <gavin.cornwell@alfresco.com> wrote:

>Hi Peter,
>
>You¹ve made great progress already, I just have a few questions/comments
>about the changes made in revision 1588209.
>
>There are a couple of browser binding constants in CMISConstants.h
>(kCMISParameterSelector & kCMISParameterSuccinct), can you please move
>these to CMISBrowserConstants.h?
>
>rootFolderUrl and repositoryUrl properties have been added to
>RepositoryInfo. This object should match the definition of RepositoryInfo
>in the CMIS spec, furthermore, these properties are browser binding
>specific and don¹t appear to be used. I think we should keep this object
>completely generic (as it is in OpenCMIS).
>
>Is there a reason why you haven¹t used the UriBuilder objects to
>construct the URLs in the service methods i.e. in retrieveChildren and
>retrieveObject?
>
>Please note it¹s a public holiday in the UK tomorrow and Monday so
>responses might be delayed more than usual ;-)
>
>Regards,
>
>Gavin
>
>
>


Mime
View raw message