8 messages in org.apache.jackrabbit.usersRe: DM Rule #6: Files are Files are F...
FromSent OnAttachments
David NueschelerJul 7, 2007 4:29 am 
Tako SchotanusJul 10, 2007 4:37 am 
fmandelbaumOct 29, 2007 1:06 pm 
Julian ReschkeOct 30, 2007 12:37 am 
David NueschelerOct 30, 2007 3:13 am 
Julian ReschkeOct 30, 2007 4:10 am 
Felix MeschbergerOct 30, 2007 4:11 am 
Fabián MandelbaumOct 30, 2007 4:30 am 
Actions with this message:
Paste this link in email or IM:
Paste this link in email or IM:
Atom feed for this thread
Paste this URL into your reader:
Subject:Re: DM Rule #6: Files are Files are Files.Actions...
From:Felix Meschberger (fmes@gmail.com)
Date:Oct 30, 2007 4:11:49 am
List:org.apache.jackrabbit.users

Hi,

Am Dienstag, den 30.10.2007, 11:14 +0100 schrieb David Nuescheler:

But as Julian said, this is debated regularly. I must admit though that I have never understood the argument from the "other side" ;) ...and that's why in my model the meta properties always live on nt:resource.

When assuming the Unix FS analogy of the nt:file node being the directory entry and the nt:resource node being the INode (aka file data), it becomes quite clear that file contents related meta data should reside in the jcr:content (extension of jcr:resource usually) child node of the nt:file node. The nt:file node is the "name" and besides ACL will not have more.

Considering this, it also makes sense to not have the last modification time in the nt:file node but to have the creation time there ...

Regards Felix