On Tue, 2004-04-13 at 11:22, Gianugo Rabellino wrote:
> Guido Casper wrote:
>
> > Gianugo Rabellino wrote:
> >
> >> Rolf Kulemann wrote:
> >>
> >>> Hello,
> >>>
> >>> I set up a small cocoon app which uses the Repository interface.
> >>> I'm now up to a point where would use a kind of property query in order
> >>> to receive all resources/paths matching the query.
> >>>
> >>> Currently the repository does not support a property "search" method.
> >>>
> >>> IMHO this is an important feature and should be a concern of the
> >>> RepositoryPropertyHelper.
> >>>
> >>> Another question is, what kind of queroes should be supported? DASL
> >>> queries???
> >>>
> >>
> >> Oh, queries... well, I really appreciate your enthousiasm, but my
> >> advice is not even dare to think that querying is going to be solved
> >> just by an email thread. JSR170 people have been fighting over it
> >> quite a while, and overall searching is _really_ a PITA.
> >>
> >> Besides, DASL isn't really a query language but rather a query
> >> wrapper: you're free to insert whatever query language you want
> >> (DAV:basicsearch being the most prominent one) inside DASL (which
> >> boils also to an HTTP method + a bunch of headers).
> >>
> >> Consider also that it's not just the query language, but even how
> >> results are reported.
> >>
> >> MHO? I really feel uncomfortable with the repository abstraction as a
> >> whole since, after all, it has to be somehow modeled into webdav. I'm
> >> fine with it as long as it's lightweight enough, but for more serious
> >> needs I'd much rather wait for JSR170 to come out.
> >
> >
> > Hmm, I'm also looking forward to JSR170. Don't you think there is place
> > for wrappers/abstractions of higher level (better mapping to Cocoon
> > concepts)?
>
> I think so, yes, but with the notable exception of searching. I really
> don't see how you can come out with a searching "Uber-API" able to rule
> all possible repository implementations (WebDAV will use DASL, JSR170
> has two possible - and both optional - impls, a RDBMS store will have
> plain SQL: a hell of a mess). So I see only two ways out:
>
> 1. rule out searching altogether;
>
> 2. provide pitiful hooks such as
Makes sense to me. what do others think??
> [...]
> Well, you have also to consider that JSR170's goal is to become the one
> and only interface to repositories of all size and needs, so I do
> expect, in the end, that this particular component can be superseded.
> But it depends, for now, from a large number of things to happen. Too
> many to rule out the abstraction right not.
Very good point. So, cocoons rep. intercface(s) will stay "searchless" ?
--
Regards,
Rolf Kulemann
