Mailing-List: contact dev-help@jackrabbit.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@jackrabbit.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of julian.reschke@gmx.de
 designates 212.227.15.15 as permitted sender)
Message-ID: <524ADCDB.3080708@gmx.de>
Date: Tue, 01 Oct 2013 16:31:55 +0200
From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64;
 rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: dev@jackrabbit.apache.org
Subject: Re: node naming
References: <JIRA.12671373.1380552378956@arcas>
 <JIRA.12671373.1380552378956.4400.1380552389702@arcas>
 <524AD6EA.60000@gmx.de>
 <CAOFYJNYSs5Vgm6_WwVEcxVXzzzPCMWnff6vHgLzDPnsRy_+Mpg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAOFYJNYSs5Vgm6_WwVEcxVXzzzPCMWnff6vHgLzDPnsRy_+Mpg@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

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