On 5/11/07, Kalyan Sarkar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Thanks a lot, I misunderstood the '*' for any name.
'*' does stand for any name, maybe i misunderstood your question ;)
a few examples:
[foo]
+ * (nt:base)
declares a node type 'foo' which can have any number of child nodes
of type 'nt:base' (i.e., any type) and any name. the names of the child
nodes however must be unique.
[foo]
+ bar (nt:base) multiple
declares a node type 'foo' which can have any number of child nodes
named 'bar'. so called same-name-sibling nodes are distinguished by
an 1-based index.
[foo]
+ bar (nt:base)
declares a node type 'foo' which can have 0 or 1 child node
named 'bar'.
cheers
stefan
Regards,
kalyan
Stefan Guggisberg wrote:
>
> hi kalyan
>
> On 5/10/07, Kalyan Sarkar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> May sound stupid, but is there a way to define a nodetype that can have
>> any
>> no. of child nodes?
>
> just specify '*' as the name in the child node definition.
> nt:unstructered is an example
> for a such a node type.
>
> cheers
> stefan
>
>> --
>> View this message in context:
>> http://www.nabble.com/Any-number-of-child-nodes--tf3722026.html#a10414651
>> Sent from the Jackrabbit - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>
>>
>
>
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Any-number-of-child-nodes--tf3722026.html#a10426412
Sent from the Jackrabbit - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
