Michael Wechner wrote:
[...]
well, I think we should cleanly separate Lenya stuff from custom stuff,
because of migration, Schema and legacy content reasons
Yes, I totally agree. But this is a different issue which applies
to many parts of the code base. I already started the separation
for Java classes. Do you have any ideas how to achieve it for
other resources as well? I guess the issue is worth another thread.
[...]
Resource types and other components could declare additional meta data
sets for specific purposes, e.g.
- access permissions in certain environments
- content descriptions
- information about search indexing (how, when, ...)
A meta data element set consists of a set of attribute keys
and is identified by a namespace.
can you give an even more specific example ;-) ?
Imagine you add a module for a "picture" resource type which
is used by a museum to store picture previews. You could introduce
a meta data set (see [1]):
<meta-data namespace-uri="http://mymuseum.org/metadata";>
<element name="painter"/>
<element name="showroom"/>
<element name="year" optional="true"/>
<element name="techniques" multiple="true"/>
</meta-data>
This way, you can clearly separate your specific meta data from
any other meta data without mis-using dublin core elements etc.
And it would be quaranteed that the repository validates
that all meta data of these resources are entered correctly.
This is not possible with an arbitrary set of custom meta data.
Here are some threads about this issue:
[1] http://www.nabble.com/-Proposal--Configurable-meta-data-t310980.html#a869474
[2] http://www.nabble.com/-RT--Generic-meta-data-t6866.html#a19579
-- Andreas
--
Andreas Hartmann
Wyona Inc. - Open Source Content Management - Apache Lenya
http://www.wyona.com http://lenya.apache.org
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
