On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 3:07 PM, Jukka Zitting <jukka.zitt...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 2:57 PM, Stefan Guggisberg > <stefan.guggisb...@gmail.com> wrote: >> now your proposal seems to imply a different architecture... > > You're reading far too much into this.
well, statements like the following lead me to this assumption: <quote> a native HTTP binding that allows remote clients to talk directly with oak-core without having to go through the JCR layer. </quote> <quote> instead of accessing separate namespace registration code, a client could register a new namespace simply by posting it as a normal content modification to the appropriate place in the content tree </quote> do you envision oak-jcr being a client of this http binding? > I'm just thinking of exposing a > feature that seems like it could come in handy for some potential > clients. what potential clients to you have in mind? cheers stefan > Doing so requires zero changes to our existing architecture > or APIs. > > BR, > > Jukka Zitting
