Re: [cmis] unreadable property names and current clients?

[Florent Guillaume <fg@nuxeo.com>]

Thanks, I added a comment to CMIS-112 to state my objections to  
including the property's display name.

Regarding the different topic of property id vs property name, I  
thought the discussions at the F2F had clarified this. I understood  
that the property id is an id in its own space, and is just meta- 
information for a client to know that two properties are "semantically  
equivalent", in an unspecified manner. For instance it could allow a  
repository to inform a client that the property "title" of the type  
"News" is "semantically the same" as the property "heading" of the  
type "Page".

Florent


On 5 Mar 2009, at 10:15, Jens Hübel wrote:

> Thanks Al and Florent for your feedback. It's good to see that we  
> can resolve some issues/implementation differences before the  
> PlugFest. I will create a JIRA entry to continue the discussion.
>
> @Florent: Our client also does the lookup in the property  
> definition. However I am not happy with this approach as it causes  
> an unnecessary burden to the client to cache in some form the  
> property definitions. In a large repository there easily can be tens  
> of thousands of properties. Also if I consider a  mobile device as a  
> potential CMIS client I would like to avoid this additional lookup.
>
> I had the same idea as Al. It would be helpful and nice to deliver  
> the display name everywhere where we get a property value. I will  
> file a JIRA change request to change the spec in this aspect. I also  
> suggest to add a comment to the spec that a property name can be a  
> technical name and that only the display name should be presented to  
> the user. A similar situation is if the client wants to create a  
> query: The spec enforces that the property name is used as a column  
> name in a query. If we get query name and display name with a  
> property value we should be fine for both cases.
>
> The confusion with property id vs. property name was discussed on  
> the f2f meeting. It seems that the issue is that the property id "is  
> unique" (without mentioning in what space) and the name is unique  
> within the type hierarchy and to be used in a query. So both are  
> unique but one is more unique than the other and this more unique is  
> repository specific. If I remember correctly there was a use case  
> for this that nobody exactly could remember. Summarizing the  
> discussion here the use case looks like to expose "the URI or un- 
> mangled form of the property". In this way a repository can expose  
> something that is unique in whatever scope it considers useful. This  
> makes sense to me. However I am still not sure what a client should  
> do with this information. My suggestion would be to add this  
> information to the spec where the property id is introduced. This  
> seems to be a separate JIRA issue.
>
> I filed those under:
>
> http://tools.oasis-open.org/issues/browse/CMIS-112
> http://tools.oasis-open.org/issues/browse/CMIS-113
>
> Of course feel free to extend and improve the proposal.
>
> Jens
>

-- 
Florent Guillaume, Head of R&D, Nuxeo
Open Source, Java EE based, Enterprise Content Management (ECM)
http://www.nuxeo.com   http://www.nuxeo.org   +33 1 40 33 79 87