jackrabbit-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Tako Schotanus" <quinte...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: DM Rule #2: Drive the content hierarchy, don't let it happen.
Date Tue, 10 Jul 2007 07:44:34 GMT
But you have also lost any relation the two have, the only one who
"knows" there is any relationship is your application. Any repository
management tools you are going to use will have to be specifically
written/adjusted to handle this.

I do agree with your basic premise that you should think carefully
about your hierarchy although it seems to go directly against your
rule #1?

Imposed hierarchy or node types, they are both ways of reducing
flexibility to improve workability (leaving complete flexibility would
mean that your code would have to be able to take into account any
possible configuration of data, probably leaving it incapable of doing
much or at least it would make the code immensely complex)

I can see the merit of the "Data First" argument, but I think the word
"first" needs to be stressed, it implies there is a "second". Because
if you're going to use a strict hierarchy for your nodes but you don't
use the type system to fix at least the important relationships you
are left with a very brittle data structure that will be very
susceptible to changes made by code/a person who isn't aware of all
the assumptions made by its designer.

PS: I'm not saying that every aspect of your data should be modeled, I
think one of the great things about the JCR is the fact that you can
make type definitions but still leave room for extensions/additions.
What is needed is an easier way to "upgrade" an existing node type
(and the existing content based on it) incrementally each time that
your knowledge about the structure of a piece of data improves. That
way you can start with "Data First" knowing that you'll be able to
easily move it to "Structure Second"... well something like that
anyway ;-)

On 7/9/07, Bertrand Delacretaz <bdelacretaz@apache.org> wrote:
> On 7/9/07, Thomas Mueller <thomas.tom.mueller@gmail.com> wrote:
> >... > /content/myblog/posts/iphone_shipping
> > > /content/myblog/comments/iphone_shipping
> >
> > A potential problem I see here is typos. What if you wrote 'phone'
> > instead of 'iphone' by mistake, and somebody make a comment already:
> > you need to update two nodes (more if you have other groups). ...
> I wouldn't update node names if the post's title changes later. The
> node name is just a system-generated key which happens to look like
> the original post's title. Many blog engines work like that, and never
> change the post's URL.
> -Bertrand

View raw message