Hi, On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 4:46 PM, Julian Reschke <[email protected]> wrote: > For OAK, we need to decide how to generate identifiers for nodes that aren't > referenceable. > > In Jackrabbit, we simply assign UUIDs to every node, referenceable or not. > > My assumption was that we don't want that here, right?
I'd say so, right. > The obvious alternative is to use the identifier of the closest > referenceable ancestor, and combine it with a relative path. That would make > the identifier stable across certain move/rename operations. Yes. > If we want to do this, we'll need to walk the tree up, and consider what it > would mean for a parent node not to be readable. Both for this and for the tree traversal case I think it would be useful if we could distinguish between a node being "readable" and "traversable", a bit like how the execute bit on directories works on unix platforms. A non-readable node could still allow a subtree to be accessed with proper access controls, but a non-traversable node would in effect deny read access to the entire subtree for the affected users. BR, Jukka Zitting
