hi jukka
On 4/25/13 11:44 AM, Jukka Zitting wrote:
Hi,
On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 12:34 PM, Angela Schreiber<[email protected]> wrote:
from a pure node type point of view it was legal to create
a node named "rep:policy" underneath a nt:unstructured node.
similarly an nt:unstructured node would allow you to create
a child of type "rep:ACL"...
See the suggestion about reserved namespaces from my previous post.
I'd guard against such cases by only allowing content in a reserved
namespace like "rep/internal" to occur when covered by a named item
definition in a built-in node type.
if that doesn't cause any backwards compatibility issues i am fine
with moving the validation to the node type hook. i have strong feelings
about where the validation occurs as long as it's present.
kind regards
angela
BR,
Jukka Zitting
