> And I have one more question: an XML tree can have a tree ID even > if it is not in a collection. The tree id is used in the construction of > structural references, and maybe in other places that I don't remember right > now. In your merge proposal I see that the tree id is changed when a tree is > inserted in a collection, its tree id changes. Are you sure this is OK? And > does it really need to change?
My understanding of the status quo is that the tree ID is already set using the new collection's tree ID generator (when calling setCollection() with a non-NULL collection): - if (collection != NULL) - theId = collection->createTreeId(); And the tree ID is left unchanged when leaving the collection. setCollection has now been replaced with the more explicit attachToCollection and detachFromCollection of the StructuredItem API, but I think that the behaviour described above should be left intact by this merge proposal in both cases. Does it make sense? -- https://code.launchpad.net/~zorba-coders/zorba/xml-in-json-indices/+merge/122548 Your team Zorba Coders is subscribed to branch lp:zorba. -- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~zorba-coders Post to : firstname.lastname@example.org Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~zorba-coders More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp