- From: David Nuescheler <david@day.com>
- Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2010 20:08:19 +0200
- To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Cc: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org
Hi Julian, thanks for the additional color. Let me chime in on one aspect... >> I think in JCR we went all out and in my mind went too far with >> binaries. I think I would be happy with having a single optional >> binary stream. >> More importantly though since this is about fine-grained information >> the typical case will be having "no" binary at all, but just a tree of >> properties (and "nodes?"). > Would a zero length content work as well? Well, personally, I would rather avoid that route. I thought about this from various different aspects and while it of course works from an implementation and usage standpoint I would argue that it sets the wrong expectation and targets the wrong use cases. In my mind the general case is that the "nodes" (or the lack of a better term) do not have a "binary stream" associated, and in exceptional cases they do. I see the fine-grained nature more similar to rows of a table in relational database. So in my mind it is important to identify the "binary content" as the special case and make sure that the "binary content-less" concept is treated as the general case, and not the other way around. I realize that this is just a matter of setting the perception correctly but that's precisely why would like to be careful ;) regards, david
Received on Monday, 30 August 2010 18:08:50 UTC