hi guys, personally, i don't care too much as long as we keep the "simple case" namely where the default namehint (if it is not explicitly set) is derived from jcr:title, title etc..
of course, i think we should (like for all form elements that have a special meaning to sling) prefix it with "sling:" my personal favorite would be "sling:nameHint" regards, david On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 5:05 PM, Carsten Ziegeler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Bertrand Delacretaz wrote: > > > On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 4:38 PM, Felix Meschberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > > > > > ...Can we find something > > > else than "nodeName" ? How about "exactName" ?... > > > > > > > nodeName is IMHO better, as the parameter describes the name of the > > created node...exactName could be the exact name of your sister ;-) > > > > > :) > > > > But to be consistent, nameHint should be nodeNameHint maybe. A bit > > longish but very clear. > > > > > Ok, we should either use "nodeNameHint" and "nodeName" > > or > > "name" and "nameHint" > > From those two options I would prefer the first one. > > Carsten > > > > > > > > ... And then, I would not filter or otherwise mangle the exact name > (this is > > > the difference to Betrand's proposal) and rather fail if the name is > > > invalid.... > > > > > > > We are in agreement, that's what I suggested, no filtering for nodeName. > > > > -Bertrand > > > > > > > > -- > Carsten Ziegeler > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > -- Visit: http://dev.day.com/ - Day JCR Cup 08 - Win a MacBook Pro
