+0 I think this use case (for me) would be just over the line: the correct answer would be to write a custom servlet (as you did). Making the sling POST servlet more complicated doesn't seem worth it.
But I don't feel strongly (thus the +0). Jeff. > -----Original Message----- > From: Alexander Klimetschek [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: 15 August 2012 18:30 > To: [email protected] > Subject: [POST servlet] Wildcard for deleting properties > > Hi, > > I had an interesting use case, which could be solved by allowing something > like this in the Sling POST servlet: > > *@Delete = true > > Which would delete all properties and child nodes of a node, without the > client knowing which are there. Similarly, this could also apply to @CopyFrom > and @MoveFrom. > > WDYT? > > Here is my use case: I want to basically rewrite a node's sub tree (including > its properties), while *not* recreating the node. > > The latter is important because it's an ordered child node. Once I recreate > the node in some way (explicitly or using @CopyFrom or @MoveFrom), I am forced > to do 2 additional requests - one to get the initial order and remember it, > and then a separate one to do the ordering, as the :order operation only works > with the request resource, so you can't hook it into a post call which does > other things first. And since I really want an atomic operation (one request > and one session.save()), this approach is not feasible. > > With a *@Delete approach I (think I) could do my rewriting (in my case moving > the node's sub tree down to a sub node; using two @MoveFrom calls and a > temporary node) in one step. > > Note that I looked at all approaches I could find. This includes a json > roundtrip using :content-import, but this also doesn't support rewriting a > node's properties without replacing the entire node itself, and it would force > another reorder call if I rewrite things. (Note that I really do *not* want to > touch the siblings of the node, i.e. doing a larger rewrite). Currently I have > a custom servlet doing the necessary steps. > > Note that I already wrote a special servlet to handle my case, so this might > not be too important. Just in case others see the same need. > > Cheers, > Alex
