jackrabbit-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Julian Reschke <julian.resc...@gmx.de>
Subject Re: node naming
Date Tue, 01 Oct 2013 14:31:55 GMT
On 2013-10-01 16:17, Jukka Zitting wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Tue, Oct 1, 2013 at 10:06 AM, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> wrote:
>> What are our expections with respect to certain normalizations of node names
>> a repository *might* do, such as:
>
>>From the implementation perspective: I think such concerns should be
> taken care of on a level above the repository. At best I'd see the
> repository enforcing a particular naming policy by refusing to create
> content with un-normalized names.
>
>>From the client perspective: I guess a client should be prepared for a
> repository that actively does normalize names, as I don't think the
> spec rules something like that out and as the spec was written in a
> way that would allow it to be implemented on top of existing backends
> that already may do such normalization. In practice that would
> probably mean that a Node returned from getNode() or addNode() might
> not have the exact same name as the one given as the argument.
> ...

Well, the call could either fail (in which case the client would have a 
hard time to figure out how to proceed),  or it can pass (and the 
returned node would "know" its name).

I think I'd prefer the latter.

Questions:

1) Is this something the spec needs to say?

2) Is this something we want to do in Jackrabbit?

3) Or in Oak?

Best regards, Julian

Mime
View raw message