KS> What if it was something that was stupid simple like automatically KS> creating two collections, one for documents and one for metadata? Each
We have adopted such a 'stupid simple' approach. It works well. We'd rather think of the approach as simple than stupid of course... Any term used, the separation of metadata from the contents based on a prefixed subcollection (prefix reserved) has several advantages over storing them inside documents. KS> The metadata doc KS> would have database managed portions and user managed portions, Amazing coincidence in thinking. It only proves the design is simple and intuitive... KS> The meta-data collection name would just have a reserved prefix/suffix and KS> could be ignored in collection listings. Exactly :) KS> Maybe It could be an option so that if you don't want the overhead you Exactly :) KS> access the data like any other collection. It wouldn't even require any KS> changes to the XML:DB APi if you layered on top. Exactly. Amazing, I could have been an author of your e-mail... KS> It's kind of hacky, but it's simple and in reality it might work decently KS> well. It does. We have such an API. KS> I don't know, just a thought. A very good one. Thanks, it to some extent proves we chose the right approach to the problem we faced (i.e. lack of versioning/ metadata). Dawid
