On 20.06.11 15:22, "Thomas Mueller" <[email protected]> wrote: >>This is actually the way I's prefer to go. > >Me too - otherwise, I wouldn't have implemented those classes :-) >Val.toString() returns Json by the way.
If json provides the right amount of (standardized) unstructuredness I guess it's useful (and can be "natively" remoted). What about using the json library in-memory representations for the microkernel to avoid serialization/parsing if not necessary? >When implementing my jackrabbit-j3 prototype, I found that it makes sense >to re-use the value implementation, but it might not make sense for the >node implementation. And about property implementation: I think it's just >not needed at all. There is no need for a property class, except on the >JCR API level. The microkernel should not validate properties or do any fancy stuff with it, so a generic string -> value map is all there is, right? Regards, Alex -- Alexander Klimetschek Developer // Adobe (Day) // Berlin - Basel
