Just a piece of advice Alfie: DONT use nodetypes unless you absolutely need them.
I mean, if you are sure 100% that your content will never ever change, then ok define a nodetype and its properties. If you think your content will change a bit from time to time and you need to classify it by nodetype then define a nodetype with nr:unstructured as primaryType. For any other cases: use nt:unstructured ! Nicolas On Tue, Oct 7, 2008 at 4:05 PM, Brian Thompson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > In a way, Jackrabbit already supports a 'lax' mode; just use > nt:unstructured > for all your nodes. No structure will be mandated. > > -Brian > > On Tue, Oct 7, 2008 at 2:19 PM, Alfie Kirkpatrick < > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > I'm new to Jackrabbit and have read with interest some of the archive > posts > > and JIRAs on the evolving support for changes to node type definitions > when > > there are active nodes using those definitions. These seem to assume as > > fundamental that a node shall always conform to its node type. > > > > From a site development point of view where Jackrabbit might be the > content > > repository, this causes some concern to me. Sites change, requirements > > change. To me the node type definition should be more of a guide to the > > intent for the structure of the node rather than enforce very strict > > validation. To me it's a bit like the question whether an XML editor with > > DTD/schema validation should ever allow an invalid document to be > created, > > even temporarily. Most end up taking the approach that it's sometimes > > necessary to make a document invalid on the way to making it valid again, > > and this seems reasonable to me. > > > > So my question is really whether Jackrabbit is ever likely to support a > > 'lax' mode where node types can be changed even if this causes existing > > nodes to become invalid, or whether it's part of the fundamental design > that > > this should not be possible, ever. > > > > Apologies if this goes over old ground and thanks in advance for your > > interest. > > Alfie. > > > -- Nicolas Dufour
