hi roland
I did patch the builtin-nodetypes.xml.
see below
It looks like this.
<nodeType name="nt:hierarchyNode" isMixin="false"
hasOrderableChildNodes="false" primaryItemName="">
<supertypes>
<!-- EXARI_PATCH_2 accept any kind of property -->
<supertype>nt:base</supertype>
<!--supertype>nt:unstructured</supertype-->
<!-- END EXARI_PATCH_2 accept any kind of property
-->
</supertypes>
you don't allow any kind of properties as long as
the nt:unstructured is commented... right?
I am aware that patching builtin-nodetypes.xml is a really dirty hack
sure :) you should rather create your own derived nodetype
in the custom_nodetypes.xml (don't remember the exact name).
[...] but I am only talking POC here.
ok. only talking POC...
i depends on your needs. what is the nature of the
expected child-nodes (i.e. your dav-resources).
instead of making the collection nt:unstructured (you
loose the forced nodetype of the children) you may
simply create a nodetype that defines an extra
propertydefinition saying:
* (residual, any name allowed) UNDEFINED (any type allowed) default
type is String (most reasonable)
multivalue,mandatory,protected,autocreated all false.
but... as said: it depends on your needs. you have to
evaluate that before... a think about default primary
type (that reigns how/if addNode without nt-name will
behave) and primary item....
I believe this hack should allow me to put properties on a folder but no
luck so far.
see above (in case you really have the nt:unstructured commented).
the nt:base is just a 'marker nodetype'. it doesn't define
any child item definitions.
I've made a couple of other changes in the xml (versioning related) and that
worked just nicely
why?
i wouldn't do that. webdav is a protocol. it shouldn't
define how the repository has to look like.
What do you think
don't blame the cockroaches ;)
angela
