Hi, [s/dev@/oak-dev@/]
On Thu, Mar 8, 2012 at 12:47 AM, Michael Dürig <mdue...@apache.org> wrote: > Right. I should have read the Javadoc ;-) However, I'd make it more explicit > there, that sub classes must not refine equality (i.e. take into account > values of other fields). This will in almost any case lead to a broken > contract. For example (emphasis added): "Two property states are considered > equal if *and only if* both their names and encoded values match." Good point. Done in revision 1298833. On a related note, we probably need to think about value encoding at some point. Are we happy with having *all* property values persisted as strings (or parsed/re-formatted at the storage layer), or should we allow native formatting at least for basic types like numbers and booleans? A related question is handling of value arrays for multivalued properties. BR, Jukka Zitting
