El jue, 09-03-2006 a las 09:58 +0100, Andreas Hartmann escribió: > Thorsten Scherler wrote: > > [...] > > >> btw, you might just want to improve the line above by using the lenya > >> protocol, etc. ;-) > > > > Well http://lenya.apache.org/1_4/reference/protocols/lenya.html > > "The resolution of the URI is based on the context: protocol handler." > > so not an option. > > That's not the whole story. The lenya:// protocol just points to respository > nodes. Whether the nodes use context:// sources, or JCR nodes, or whatever, > depends on the NodeFactory you use. >
Does that mean that I can get with Node node = getRepositoryNode(destination); node.lock(); any given destination uri? > > > lenya-doc http://lenya.apache.org/1_4/reference/protocols/lenyadoc.html > > is assuming file extension xml as far as I understand it ATM, so not an > > option. > > That's only because the DocumentIdToPathMapper is tied to the publication > and not to the resource type. We have already discussed that. ok > > > One could extend the above protocols though (I think best would be the > > lenya-doc). The only protocol that I made aware of the content-dir is > > the fallback:// but it feels like an abuse to use it to get content. > > This is true. Please don't use it! ;) > > Further it does not solve the "custom DocumentIdToPathMapper" problem. > > Yes, which is the root of all evil in this issue. We have to solve it, > then the problems will vanish. Ok, then we should start the meta data stuff. > -- Andreas > Thanks for your feedback. :) salu2 -- thorsten "Together we stand, divided we fall!" Hey you (Pink Floyd) --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
