>I like Stefan's Content proposal but it's really a ContentTree, right?
to be precise the current "Content" interface represents one node in the tree - so alternative names could be "ContentNode" or "ContentResource"? stefan
>I like Stefan's Content proposal but it's really a ContentTree, right?
to be precise the current "Content" interface represents one node in the tree - so alternative names could be "ContentNode" or "ContentResource"? stefan