Josias Thoeny wrote:
On Tue, 2005-09-20 at 17:17 +0200, Andreas Hartmann wrote:
Josias Thoeny wrote:
[...]
Or should there be no sitetree attributes at all, only meta data?
IMO yes, there should be only meta data.
One could argue that the sitetree is just a view of the data, and the
visibility is a property of the view, not of the data itself.
That's a good point. We should probably really separate the actual
content from all site structure and presentation information.
Actually I'm not sure if we need generic attributes for site structure
nodes / document references. IIRC the main reason for introducing them was that
meta data are not available during the generation of navigation components.
IMO that should be solved in another way (MetaDataSitetreeTransformer).
If we completely separate site structure from document repository,
we could introduce something like this:
class DocumentReference {
Document getDocument();
String getNavigationTitle();
boolean isVisibleInNavigation();
}
Now we could go one step further and disentangle document repository
and URL space:
URL -> DocumentReference -> Document
The problem about meta data is that they can't be resolved during
site structure traversal, e.g., in an XSLT that is applied to the
sitetree.
We could add a transformation to the sitetree which adds the meta data
as attributes (or a particular subset of the meta data). With JCR,
the performance issue might be secondary.
Our experience with the jcr sitetree (each sitetree node is represented
by a jcr node with properties) showed that the performance could be a
problem. The generation of navigation elements (e.g. the menu) was much
slower than with the in-memory dom sitetree. But it also depends on the
number of nodes.
OK, that's good to know.
-- Andreas
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
