2013/7/3 Alexander Klimetschek <[email protected]>

> On 03.07.2013, at 17:34, Radu Cotescu <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > 1. Currently there's no support for hierarchical structures. ValueMap
> > doesn't provide this kind of support.
>
> Yes, the jcr property value map implementation supports relative paths.
> This should definitely be supported, as you very quickly have a nested
> structure with JCR and the sling post servlet.
>
> So field names supporting relative paths should all there is required -
> this is in line with the sling post servlet.
>
>
It was a mistake to add support for paths to the jcr value map - note that
the jcr implementation of the modifiable value map does not support setting
a property with a path - same with the whole create and update stuff in
Sling's resource api. Other resource implementations don't allow paths for
properties.
If I could turn back the time I wouldn't add path support to the value map.
It creates several problems implementation wise and blures the difference
between a resource and its properties.
For all future things we should have clean approaches.

There might be resource types which require child resource (types) to exist
- and we need a way to validate this. I think the correct way would be to
have a validator which checks for such a child resource of a type and have
separate validator sets for both, the parent and the child resource.

Carsten

> 2. As long as the Field from the ValidationModel specifies a certain
> > Validator to be used for validating the field's value I don't see why we
> > couldn't have a Validator that checks the data in an external system. The
> > single current constraint of a Validator is that it has to provide a
> > validate method, returning a boolean. The implementation can be done
> > however the developer  sees fit.
>
> If the Validator is a service/component, then it can easily reference
> other services.
>
> Cheers,
> Alex
>
>


-- 
Carsten Ziegeler
[email protected]

Reply via email to