jackrabbit-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From lists <li...@digby.net>
Subject Re: NodeDefinition.getDefaultPrimaryType()
Date Mon, 05 Sep 2005 20:00:57 GMT
Thanks Stefan,

I'd actually snipped out the supertypes, so that's all working fine. 
Will recompile the latest source and see if it makes a difference. Were 
you suggesting that I also need to change my child node definitions?

Digby


Stefan Guggisberg wrote:
> On 9/1/05, lists <lists@digby.net> wrote:
> 
>>Hi,
>>
>>I'm just wondering if I've found a bug with the above method, or if I
>>just don't understand the way it should work.
>>
>>I have the following content type defined (stripped down a little):
>>
>>   <nodeType name="article" isMixin="false"
>>hasOrderableChildNodes="true" primaryItemName="">
>>     <childNodeDefinition name="*" defaultPrimaryType="paragraph"
>>autoCreated="false" mandatory="false" onParentVersion="COPY"
>>protected="false" sameNameSiblings="true" />
>>     <childNodeDefinition name="*" defaultPrimaryType="attachment"
>>autoCreated="false" mandatory="false" onParentVersion="COPY"
>>protected="false" sameNameSiblings="true" />
>>   </nodeType>
>>
>>When i run the following code (where nt is the article NodeType):
>>
>>NodeDefinition[] defs = (NodeDefinition[]) nt.getChildNodeDefinitions();
>>for (int i=0; i<defs.length; i++) {
>>     System.out.println(defs[i].getDefaultPrimaryType().getName());
>>}
>>
>>I get:
>>attachment
>>attachment
>>
>>rather than:
>>paragraph
>>attachment
>>
>>Is this expected?
> 
> 
> nope, that's a bug, or more precisely: a side effect of a bug in the
> node type validation
> code. your node type contains ambiguous child node definitions, i.e. your
> node type definition is not valid.
> 
> i fixed this issue in rev. 267220.
> 
> btw: your definitions are missing the supertypes declaration, but
> that's another issue.
> 
> cheers
> stefan
> 
> 
>>Many thanks in advance,
>>
>>Digby
>>
>>
> 
> 


Mime
View raw message