OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.

 


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

cmis message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]


Subject: [OASIS Issue Tracker] Commented: (CMIS-723) Need to express othercmis:object types to clients.



    [ http://tools.oasis-open.org/issues/browse/CMIS-723?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=26724#action_26724 ] 

Jay Brown commented on CMIS-723:
--------------------------------

I agree that the idea of having a Mixins (from various discussions) would solve this problem in a very elegant and flexible way. 
e.g. If we had factored out mixins for (1) containable, (2) hasContent,  (3) versionable, my custom object issue could be solved by a document without the 2 and 3 mixins.   So I would like to suspend this discussion pending a decision on the 'secondary object types' discussion (CMIS-713)

> Need to express other cmis:object types to clients. 
> ----------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: CMIS-723
>                 URL: http://tools.oasis-open.org/issues/browse/CMIS-723
>             Project: OASIS Content Management Interoperability Services (CMIS) TC
>          Issue Type: New Feature
>          Components: Domain Model
>    Affects Versions: V1.1
>            Reporter: Jay Brown
>
> There are many use cases for expression of other object types that are neither cmis:folder, cmis:document, cmis:policy nor cmis:relationship.   Examples include document-like types that do not permit versioning or do not permit a content stream (P8 has these),  ancillary objects like annotations, or even objects that represent complex types which are currently not permitted in the CMIS 1.0 property model. 
> I see two ways these could be expressed.   The first is simply to have implementations show cmis:object as the top of the types collections instead of starting with cmis:object's proper children.    The simplicity of this approach is cancelled out however by the fact this this would likely break most CMIS 1.0 clients.   So I have a suggestion which expresses the same idea, not as elegantly but without the backward compatibility issues. 
> In the object model, declare a new base object 'cmis:custom' which would serve as the base type for the entire genus  of all of these currently CMIS/orphaned objects.   It would have identical attributes to cmis:object 
> (i.e. Id, localName, localNamespace, queryName, displayName, baseId, parentId, description, creatable,  fileable, queryable,  controllablePolicy, controllableACL, fulltextIndexed, includedInSupertypeQuery )
> though different values for those attributes of course.    For example it would be recommended that the cmis:custom object be creatable=false since it is a more of an abstract class type.    The implementation  could optionally make cmis:custom queryable=true.
> Note: No xml schema changes needed. 
> Thus 1.0 clients when querying types on a 1.1 server would just see 5 types instead of (4) as they do with 1.0 servers.     The normal inheritance model would follow from there as is done with the other types.   If cmis:custom was not supported then it would not appear in the type (children and descendants) feeds just like the optional cmis:relationship and cmis:policy behave today. 

-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators: http://tools.oasis-open.org/issues/secure/Administrators.jspa
-
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira

        


[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]