Hi tobias
the existance of a jcr:primaryType property state is not part of the
> consistency of a persistence manager. this would be redundant, > since the nodetypename is also stored in the respective node state. > IMO, the jcr:primaryType property should be dynamically generated out > of the information in the node state and not to be stored seperately > in the persistence manager as property state.
I have no preference, I'd like to store the primary type either as any other property or as a special property. The problem is that in most cases the primary type is passed to the PM as a PropertyState and in at least one case it's not. Is there any reason for not chosing a single criteria?
With the current behaviour If I store it as a special property I should also add an if statement that ignores the PropertyState if it's a primary type. Is it the right way?
regards edgar
