Mailing-List: contact jackrabbit-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: jackrabbit-dev@incubator.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (hermes.apache.org: domain of david.nuescheler@gmail.com
 designates 64.233.170.205 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws;
        s=beta; d=gmail.com;
        h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:references;
        b=GFG7UY4L+5hentWZDULZinGMCon92sqIftBxXP7zFPGe1a7VicjGQEQGDnRrdwvaJ2XLV4oz6V1Bk8DvytQKb3oBB5LSpk8EawIaMCg+aBrJ7fRmZw2MQL307BdFVjqqA5iF78MAZ1SKBkuQvEXRv4KctuHm6HDn1gsNz9O9mrU=
Message-ID: <eb7e21904103103072a615524@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 31 Oct 2004 12:07:01 +0100
From: David Nuescheler <david.nuescheler@gmail.com>
Reply-To: david.nuescheler@day.com
To: jackrabbit-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Public NodeType Library (pntl)
In-Reply-To: <1099221661.4416.20.camel@swan.rkunet.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: <eb7e219041030074134143b67@mail.gmail.com>
	 <4183D455.8060300@apache.org>
	 <eb7e21904103101416baa6fa4@mail.gmail.com>
	 <1099221661.4416.20.camel@swan.rkunet.org>

hi rolf,

> Interesting discussion here. I have to admit I'm not a semantic web
> profi, but we/I in Lenya land have the idea to describe things like
> workflow (and maybe other parts) with, eh, ontologies. We then would use
> those _conceptual_ metadata to describe workflow of documents.
> This is just a draft idea maybe only living in my head, and I'm not sure
> if we should attach the wf meta data direct to document nodes or keep
> them separate. We aren't that far in that discussion, yet.

i think the workflow would be a very interesting topic to agree upon.
since it has a very limited scope. i would also not call it meta information
it is just application data in my mind and the application happens to be a
"workflow" application.

currently we (day software) model our workflow in a fashion that
is directly attached to the "document" (well, content really... ).

i think it should not be too difficult to model a nodetype that could
be directly attached as a mixin to a document or just refer to it.

i would be very interested in having a discussion thread to 
see if we can reach any consensus on a minimal "workflow" 
nodetype that we could use as an example workflow model 
in our applications... anybody interested?

regards,
david