On 7/20/07, Jukka Zitting <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi,
On 7/20/07, Julian Reschke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Alexandru Popescu ? wrote:
> > I would really appreciate if somebody would post on this thread a
> > scenario in which the current behavior is proving helpful (and I have
> > in mind the scenario posted here: searching for a John and getting a
> > Joe instead -- frankly speaking I would be totally surprised in real
> > life if I would be looking for my wife and getting somebody else
> > instead :-) ).
>
> I don't think the current JCR behavior was specced this way because
> there are uses cases needing it. It's simply a result of queries working
> against the persisted state (as the workspace methods), while the
> regular read messages don't.
Also, I still don't think there are real use cases for the opposite
requirement, i.e. having transient changes visible in search.
Indeed, the lack of use cases for each approach is making this part of
the spec look so fragile. And I am just trying to figure out a way to
make it more clear/simple to explain-harder to argue upon/etc.
The real world analogue would be that you are getting married and even
though you've already said "I do", the magistrate would still claim
that you are not married until the proper paperwork has been
submitted. :-)
He he... I guess now we have 2 valid scenarios for each of the
perspectives (though I am wondering why both are related to marriage?
:-)) ).
bests,
./alex
--
.w( the_mindstorm )p.
BR,
Jukka Zitting
