jackrabbit-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Charles Brooking <public+jackrab...@charlie.brooking.id.au>
Subject Re: Improving the reregistering of node types
Date Fri, 27 Aug 2010 12:58:44 GMT
On 27/08/10 02:25, Alexander Klimetschek wrote:
> And you only make node types for those things where you are sure they
> are more or less fixed. For other things you keep going with
> nt:unstructured. The same way that mandatory properties change in your
> case, you will have the opposite, ie. that things that were mandatory
> become unnecessary, so generally a more relaxed approach is good for
> the long-term. That adds some more complexity to the application logic
> accessing the content (ie. it no longer expects total integrity hold
> by the underlying storage), but this also makes it more resilient.
>    

Yes, those points are straightforward.

The example I gave was an application providing access through 
Jackrabbit's WebDAV module. That case is different from a typical webapp 
because there's no clear means of adding "application logic" (or, at 
least, there wasn't when I tried in 2009). Using a WebDAV client, users 
can create/modify arbitrary nodes and properties, which makes node types 
quite useful.

(I personally don't see the problem with changing constraints between 
software releases. My experience with writing Rails migrations, for 
example, was that I could apply maximum constraints and it wasn't a pain 
at all changing them. Some people are happy with the implications of 
nt:unstructured, but I don't see why applying node types should be seen 
as so labourious.)

Later
Charlie

Mime
View raw message