You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@jackrabbit.apache.org by lists <li...@digby.net> on 2005/09/01 23:20:03 UTC
NodeDefinition.getDefaultPrimaryType()
Hi,
I'm just wondering if I've found a bug with the above method, or if I
just don't understand the way it should work.
I have the following content type defined (stripped down a little):
<nodeType name="article" isMixin="false"
hasOrderableChildNodes="true" primaryItemName="">
<childNodeDefinition name="*" defaultPrimaryType="paragraph"
autoCreated="false" mandatory="false" onParentVersion="COPY"
protected="false" sameNameSiblings="true" />
<childNodeDefinition name="*" defaultPrimaryType="attachment"
autoCreated="false" mandatory="false" onParentVersion="COPY"
protected="false" sameNameSiblings="true" />
</nodeType>
When i run the following code (where nt is the article NodeType):
NodeDefinition[] defs = (NodeDefinition[]) nt.getChildNodeDefinitions();
for (int i=0; i<defs.length; i++) {
System.out.println(defs[i].getDefaultPrimaryType().getName());
}
I get:
attachment
attachment
rather than:
paragraph
attachment
Is this expected?
Many thanks in advance,
Digby
Re: NodeDefinition.getDefaultPrimaryType()
Posted by digby <li...@digby.net>.
Great - thanks a lot.
Stefan Guggisberg wrote:
> On 9/5/05, lists <li...@digby.net> wrote:
>
>>Thanks Stefan,
>>
>>I'd actually snipped out the supertypes, so that's all working fine.
>>Will recompile the latest source and see if it makes a difference. Were
>>you suggesting that I also need to change my child node definitions?
>
>
> your first example will not validate anymore because those child node
> definitions were ambiguous. by additionally specifying different required
> types in those child node definitions you actually removed the ambiguity,
> i.e. they're fine now.
>
> cheers
> stefan
>
>
>>Digby
>>
>>
>>Stefan Guggisberg wrote:
>>
>>>On 9/1/05, lists <li...@digby.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Hi,
>>>>
>>>>I'm just wondering if I've found a bug with the above method, or if I
>>>>just don't understand the way it should work.
>>>>
>>>>I have the following content type defined (stripped down a little):
>>>>
>>>> <nodeType name="article" isMixin="false"
>>>>hasOrderableChildNodes="true" primaryItemName="">
>>>> <childNodeDefinition name="*" defaultPrimaryType="paragraph"
>>>>autoCreated="false" mandatory="false" onParentVersion="COPY"
>>>>protected="false" sameNameSiblings="true" />
>>>> <childNodeDefinition name="*" defaultPrimaryType="attachment"
>>>>autoCreated="false" mandatory="false" onParentVersion="COPY"
>>>>protected="false" sameNameSiblings="true" />
>>>> </nodeType>
>>>>
>>>>When i run the following code (where nt is the article NodeType):
>>>>
>>>>NodeDefinition[] defs = (NodeDefinition[]) nt.getChildNodeDefinitions();
>>>>for (int i=0; i<defs.length; i++) {
>>>> System.out.println(defs[i].getDefaultPrimaryType().getName());
>>>>}
>>>>
>>>>I get:
>>>>attachment
>>>>attachment
>>>>
>>>>rather than:
>>>>paragraph
>>>>attachment
>>>>
>>>>Is this expected?
>>>
>>>
>>>nope, that's a bug, or more precisely: a side effect of a bug in the
>>>node type validation
>>>code. your node type contains ambiguous child node definitions, i.e. your
>>>node type definition is not valid.
>>>
>>>i fixed this issue in rev. 267220.
>>>
>>>btw: your definitions are missing the supertypes declaration, but
>>>that's another issue.
>>>
>>>cheers
>>>stefan
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>Many thanks in advance,
>>>>
>>>>Digby
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
Re: NodeDefinition.getDefaultPrimaryType()
Posted by Stefan Guggisberg <st...@gmail.com>.
On 9/5/05, lists <li...@digby.net> wrote:
> Thanks Stefan,
>
> I'd actually snipped out the supertypes, so that's all working fine.
> Will recompile the latest source and see if it makes a difference. Were
> you suggesting that I also need to change my child node definitions?
your first example will not validate anymore because those child node
definitions were ambiguous. by additionally specifying different required
types in those child node definitions you actually removed the ambiguity,
i.e. they're fine now.
cheers
stefan
>
> Digby
>
>
> Stefan Guggisberg wrote:
> > On 9/1/05, lists <li...@digby.net> wrote:
> >
> >>Hi,
> >>
> >>I'm just wondering if I've found a bug with the above method, or if I
> >>just don't understand the way it should work.
> >>
> >>I have the following content type defined (stripped down a little):
> >>
> >> <nodeType name="article" isMixin="false"
> >>hasOrderableChildNodes="true" primaryItemName="">
> >> <childNodeDefinition name="*" defaultPrimaryType="paragraph"
> >>autoCreated="false" mandatory="false" onParentVersion="COPY"
> >>protected="false" sameNameSiblings="true" />
> >> <childNodeDefinition name="*" defaultPrimaryType="attachment"
> >>autoCreated="false" mandatory="false" onParentVersion="COPY"
> >>protected="false" sameNameSiblings="true" />
> >> </nodeType>
> >>
> >>When i run the following code (where nt is the article NodeType):
> >>
> >>NodeDefinition[] defs = (NodeDefinition[]) nt.getChildNodeDefinitions();
> >>for (int i=0; i<defs.length; i++) {
> >> System.out.println(defs[i].getDefaultPrimaryType().getName());
> >>}
> >>
> >>I get:
> >>attachment
> >>attachment
> >>
> >>rather than:
> >>paragraph
> >>attachment
> >>
> >>Is this expected?
> >
> >
> > nope, that's a bug, or more precisely: a side effect of a bug in the
> > node type validation
> > code. your node type contains ambiguous child node definitions, i.e. your
> > node type definition is not valid.
> >
> > i fixed this issue in rev. 267220.
> >
> > btw: your definitions are missing the supertypes declaration, but
> > that's another issue.
> >
> > cheers
> > stefan
> >
> >
> >>Many thanks in advance,
> >>
> >>Digby
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
>
Re: NodeDefinition.getDefaultPrimaryType()
Posted by lists <li...@digby.net>.
Thanks Stefan,
I'd actually snipped out the supertypes, so that's all working fine.
Will recompile the latest source and see if it makes a difference. Were
you suggesting that I also need to change my child node definitions?
Digby
Stefan Guggisberg wrote:
> On 9/1/05, lists <li...@digby.net> wrote:
>
>>Hi,
>>
>>I'm just wondering if I've found a bug with the above method, or if I
>>just don't understand the way it should work.
>>
>>I have the following content type defined (stripped down a little):
>>
>> <nodeType name="article" isMixin="false"
>>hasOrderableChildNodes="true" primaryItemName="">
>> <childNodeDefinition name="*" defaultPrimaryType="paragraph"
>>autoCreated="false" mandatory="false" onParentVersion="COPY"
>>protected="false" sameNameSiblings="true" />
>> <childNodeDefinition name="*" defaultPrimaryType="attachment"
>>autoCreated="false" mandatory="false" onParentVersion="COPY"
>>protected="false" sameNameSiblings="true" />
>> </nodeType>
>>
>>When i run the following code (where nt is the article NodeType):
>>
>>NodeDefinition[] defs = (NodeDefinition[]) nt.getChildNodeDefinitions();
>>for (int i=0; i<defs.length; i++) {
>> System.out.println(defs[i].getDefaultPrimaryType().getName());
>>}
>>
>>I get:
>>attachment
>>attachment
>>
>>rather than:
>>paragraph
>>attachment
>>
>>Is this expected?
>
>
> nope, that's a bug, or more precisely: a side effect of a bug in the
> node type validation
> code. your node type contains ambiguous child node definitions, i.e. your
> node type definition is not valid.
>
> i fixed this issue in rev. 267220.
>
> btw: your definitions are missing the supertypes declaration, but
> that's another issue.
>
> cheers
> stefan
>
>
>>Many thanks in advance,
>>
>>Digby
>>
>>
>
>
Re: NodeDefinition.getDefaultPrimaryType()
Posted by Stefan Guggisberg <st...@gmail.com>.
On 9/1/05, lists <li...@digby.net> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm just wondering if I've found a bug with the above method, or if I
> just don't understand the way it should work.
>
> I have the following content type defined (stripped down a little):
>
> <nodeType name="article" isMixin="false"
> hasOrderableChildNodes="true" primaryItemName="">
> <childNodeDefinition name="*" defaultPrimaryType="paragraph"
> autoCreated="false" mandatory="false" onParentVersion="COPY"
> protected="false" sameNameSiblings="true" />
> <childNodeDefinition name="*" defaultPrimaryType="attachment"
> autoCreated="false" mandatory="false" onParentVersion="COPY"
> protected="false" sameNameSiblings="true" />
> </nodeType>
>
> When i run the following code (where nt is the article NodeType):
>
> NodeDefinition[] defs = (NodeDefinition[]) nt.getChildNodeDefinitions();
> for (int i=0; i<defs.length; i++) {
> System.out.println(defs[i].getDefaultPrimaryType().getName());
> }
>
> I get:
> attachment
> attachment
>
> rather than:
> paragraph
> attachment
>
> Is this expected?
nope, that's a bug, or more precisely: a side effect of a bug in the
node type validation
code. your node type contains ambiguous child node definitions, i.e. your
node type definition is not valid.
i fixed this issue in rev. 267220.
btw: your definitions are missing the supertypes declaration, but
that's another issue.
cheers
stefan
>
> Many thanks in advance,
>
> Digby
>
>
Re: NodeDefinition.getDefaultPrimaryType()
Posted by lists <li...@digby.net>.
Got it. Needed:
<requiredPrimaryTypes>
<requiredPrimaryType>jcms:attachment</requiredPrimaryType>
</requiredPrimaryTypes>
(Found builtin_nodetypes.xml!)
Digby
lists wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm just wondering if I've found a bug with the above method, or if I
> just don't understand the way it should work.
>
> I have the following content type defined (stripped down a little):
>
> <nodeType name="article" isMixin="false" hasOrderableChildNodes="true"
> primaryItemName="">
> <childNodeDefinition name="*" defaultPrimaryType="paragraph"
> autoCreated="false" mandatory="false" onParentVersion="COPY"
> protected="false" sameNameSiblings="true" />
> <childNodeDefinition name="*" defaultPrimaryType="attachment"
> autoCreated="false" mandatory="false" onParentVersion="COPY"
> protected="false" sameNameSiblings="true" />
> </nodeType>
>
> When i run the following code (where nt is the article NodeType):
>
> NodeDefinition[] defs = (NodeDefinition[]) nt.getChildNodeDefinitions();
> for (int i=0; i<defs.length; i++) {
> System.out.println(defs[i].getDefaultPrimaryType().getName());
> }
>
> I get:
> attachment
> attachment
>
> rather than:
> paragraph
> attachment
>
> Is this expected?
>
> Many thanks in advance,
>
> Digby
>
>