Hi Shaun, Thanks for your consideration, but this doesn't solve my problem. If I think using a workspace for sub-area, even if I scope nodetype with customer namespace the problem I have remains. In fact addressing different definition of the same nodetype for each sub-area of the same customer remains impossible.
The only solution I could think about is defining a namespace that refer to a <customer, sub-area> couple. Ex: customer 'foo', sub-area 'bar', type 'employee' -> "foo_bar:employee". Every time a user create a new node the application must identify which real nodetype is, verifying which worspace the user's in. I thinks that this is possible, but at which cost? BR, Luca Shaun Barriball wrote: > > Hi Luca, > - Your concept of 'sub-area' could be mapped to distinct repository, > workspace or folder within a workspace. You have some flexibility here. > - However, as you noted your custom type definitions requirement is > harder > to solve. If the types 'must' have the same name then you'll need to use a > repository per customer. However, namespaces were invented for actually > this > scenario. What about scoping types using a customer specific namespace > within the same repository e.g. assuming you have a logical employee type. > Customer "foo" may us a foo:employee type and customer "bar" has a > bar:employee type. > > - Personally, I'd think a repository per customer would cause you quite a > few infrastructure and configuration headaches. > > Hope this helps, > Shaun. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Luca Tagliani [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: 31 May 2007 10:30 > To: [email protected] > Subject: Architectural question (CM application) > > > Hi all, > my company is working on a document management system which has the > following scenario: > > - one web application must service different customers from a single > installation and URL (aka Application Service Provider); > - each customer must have different (and separate) users; > - each customer is divided into sub-area; each sub-area can have different > definition of the same nodetype > > I thought to model this using a repository for the application and > workspace > for every customer, but there are limitation that doesn't permit this > implementation. > > First of all, the nodetype definitions are shared between the workspaces > of > a repository. > Second, I cannot divide a workspace in other sub-worspaces. > > So I change my vision to using different repository for each customer, and > a > workspace for each sub-area. > But this doesn't resolve the problem of having have different definition > of > the same type of nodetype for each sub-area. > Adding to this it leds me to a second type of problem: I have to define a > common entry for the users of the different customers who then will be > directed towards his correct repository. > > I'm stuck in this position. > > Could anyone help me with his suggestions? > > Thanks in advance > > Luca Tagliani > -- > View this message in context: > http://www.nabble.com/Architectural-question-%28CM-application%29-tf3845514. > html#a10890467 > Sent from the Jackrabbit - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > > > -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Architectural-question-%28CM-application%29-tf3845514.html#a10890964 Sent from the Jackrabbit - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
