jackrabbit-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Felix Meschberger <fmesc...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: data first, structure on demand
Date Tue, 26 Jan 2010 21:19:54 GMT
Hi Chad,

Have you looked at Apache Sling ?

Sling does not impose any explicit node types, yet copes very well, if
there are.

The way Sling works is, that the URL addresses the Repository Item and
from this Item a Script or Servlet is resolved which is then called to
handle the request. The one thing Sling needs in this process is a
"resource type" (we abstract a bit from the JCR API to make the Sling
implementation a lot simpler).

You might want to look at http://sling.apache.org

Regards
Felix

On 26.01.2010 19:34, ChadDavis wrote:
> I've read a lot of stuff regarding the use of unstructured and
> avoiding structured node types as long as possible.  I think I have a
> compelling reason to use a structured node type pretty early in my
> project . . . I'd like some thoughts from others who've been down this
> road.
> 
> I want to be enable a sort of run time awareness of the structure of
> documents in my CMS.  I'd like to be able to add custom document
> types, defined as node types, and have my system just handle them.  To
> do this, it seems necessary for the code to be able to "inspect" the
> structure of the document, e.g. learn what attributes is has in order
> to become aware of the document's structure so that I can render edit
> or create wizards the appropriate fields -- correspondent to the
> attributes of the node type that backs the document being created.  I
> can't really see how I can pull this off without have structured node
> types.  If you see a alternative, let me know.
> 
> Additionally, I don't see much threat in defining non-mandatory
> properties and children nodes.  It seems that this wouldn't pose any
> data migration issues, which are the main danger behind getting into a
> structured model, correct?  Thoughts?
> 

Mime
View raw message