[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: unreadable property names and current clients?
Hi all, I have a question
how the typical clients behave in regards of property names today. Properties have a
name, an id and a query name. A property definition also has a display name. In
a getChildren() or getProperties() call a property is identified by its name. Property
names have certain syntax constraints. So it might happen that a repository
needs to map its internal property identification to something that fulfills
the CMIS syntax. This could be a generated, meaningless string like PROP_4711.
Only the property definition then contains something readable in the displayName
like "Invoice number". All the examples in the spec however contain
readable property names. So my question is:
Will existing CMIS clients today display the property name directly in the user
interface or will they typically do a look-up in the property definition for the
display name before presenting this in the user interface? Any feedback is
welcome how you have implemented this today. Would I break clients by using a
generated, unreadable property name like PROP_4711? Do we need to define a
recommendation in the spec (in this case I would create a JIRA issue). Thanks Jens |
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]