Mailing-List: contact oak-dev-help@jackrabbit.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: oak-dev@jackrabbit.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of julian.reschke@gmx.de
 designates 213.165.64.22 as permitted sender)
Message-ID: <4FAB7449.10000@gmx.de>
Date: Thu, 10 May 2012 09:54:49 +0200
From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64;
 rv:12.0) Gecko/20120428 Thunderbird/12.0.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: oak-dev@jackrabbit.apache.org
CC: Angela Schreiber <anchela@adobe.com>
Subject: Re: value conversions, and relative paths in Oak
References: <20120509155236.0F1F223889E1@eris.apache.org>
 <4FAA94B2.5010305@gmx.de> <4FAB6459.1030204@adobe.com>
In-Reply-To: <4FAB6459.1030204@adobe.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On 2012-05-10 08:46, Angela Schreiber wrote:
> hi julian
>
>> 1) missing Date->long/double/decimal value conversions. I have added
>> those for now in ValueImpl (not core); is this correct, Angela?
>
> as long as we don't need it in the core, i would add it in oak-jcr.
> we can still push i down to the CoreValue later on.

That's where I put it for now.

> the basic question is again what part of the validation should be
> in which layer... that's a matter of definition rather than right
> or wrong.
>
>> 2) we didn't round-trip a relative path of ".". Now we do, but I'm not
>> sure I got the mapping correct. What is a same-node reference in Oak
>> path syntax? "." or empty string?
>
> well, i would expect "."

Indeed.

>> I also fear that we need to be able to
>> round-trip relative paths like "../foo/bar" in path values, which we
>> currently do not. Do we need a "normalize" flag???
>
> i would expect that we need it sooner or later.

+1

>> 3) Node.getNode(".") failed because it looked for a child called ".". If
>> have added a hack to make this work, but I'm wondering how to do this
>> properly.
>
> imo oak paths should always be normalized except for path values.

Which means that we need to expose that in the path mapping API, right?