DNA's NodeTypeManager implementation does not allow multiple definitions with the same name ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Key: DNA-335 URL: https://jira.jboss.org/jira/browse/DNA-335 Project: DNA Issue Type: Bug Reporter: Randall Hauch Attachments: dna-335-definitionsWithSameName.patch The JCR Specification (version 1.0.1) does not preclude that there may be multiple property definitions with the same name, or that there may be multiple child definitions with the same name. JCR 1.0 (version 1.0.1) DOES say that there may be multiple residual definitions with the same name. However, the draft version of the JSR-283 specification does have a new section 4.7.15 that specifically addresses and allows multiple definitions with the same name, as long as they are distinguishable from the other definitions with the same name (for property definitions, this means the type must be different; for child node definitions, this means the required primary types attribute). There are a number of places where the logic is expecting a single property definition (or child definition) given a node type and a definition name. This is obviously flawed. Also, our logic to select the "best" property definition or "best" child node definition doesn't seem to be correct, in that it tends to favor less-restricted definitions that are lower in the type hierarchy rather than very good matching definitions higher in the type hierarchy.

DNA's NodeTypeManager implementation does not allow multiple definitions with the same name ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Key: DNA-335 URL: https://jira.jboss.org/jira/browse/DNA-335 Project: DNA Issue Type: Bug Reporter: Randall Hauch Attachments: dna-335-definitionsWithSameName.patch, DNA-335_clean_type_source.patch The JCR Specification (version 1.0.1) does not preclude that there may be multiple property definitions with the same name, or that there may be multiple child definitions with the same name. JCR 1.0 (version 1.0.1) DOES say that there may be multiple residual definitions with the same name. However, the draft version of the JSR-283 specification does have a new section 4.7.15 that specifically addresses and allows multiple definitions with the same name, as long as they are distinguishable from the other definitions with the same name (for property definitions, this means the type must be different; for child node definitions, this means the required primary types attribute). There are a number of places where the logic is expecting a single property definition (or child definition) given a node type and a definition name. This is obviously flawed. Also, our logic to select the "best" property definition or "best" child node definition doesn't seem to be correct, in that it tends to favor less-restricted definitions that are lower in the type hierarchy rather than very good matching definitions higher in the type hierarchy.

DNA's NodeTypeManager implementation does not allow multiple definitions with the same name ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Key: DNA-335 URL: https://jira.jboss.org/jira/browse/DNA-335 Project: DNA Issue Type: Bug Reporter: Randall Hauch Attachments: dna-335-definitionsWithSameName.patch, DNA-335_clean_type_source.patch, DNA-335_overriding_definitions.patch The JCR Specification (version 1.0.1) does not preclude that there may be multiple property definitions with the same name, or that there may be multiple child definitions with the same name. JCR 1.0 (version 1.0.1) DOES say that there may be multiple residual definitions with the same name. However, the draft version of the JSR-283 specification does have a new section 4.7.15 that specifically addresses and allows multiple definitions with the same name, as long as they are distinguishable from the other definitions with the same name (for property definitions, this means the type must be different; for child node definitions, this means the required primary types attribute). There are a number of places where the logic is expecting a single property definition (or child definition) given a node type and a definition name. This is obviously flawed. Also, our logic to select the "best" property definition or "best" child node definition doesn't seem to be correct, in that it tends to favor less-restricted definitions that are lower in the type hierarchy rather than very good matching definitions higher in the type hierarchy.

DNA's NodeTypeManager implementation does not allow multiple definitions with the same name ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Key: DNA-335 URL: https://jira.jboss.org/jira/browse/DNA-335 Project: DNA Issue Type: Bug Components: JCR Affects Versions: 0.3 Reporter: Randall Hauch Fix For: 0.4 Attachments: dna-335-definitionsWithSameName.patch, DNA-335_clean_type_source.patch, DNA-335_overriding_definitions.patch The JCR Specification (version 1.0.1) does not preclude that there may be multiple property definitions with the same name, or that there may be multiple child definitions with the same name. JCR 1.0 (version 1.0.1) DOES say that there may be multiple residual definitions with the same name. However, the draft version of the JSR-283 specification does have a new section 4.7.15 that specifically addresses and allows multiple definitions with the same name, as long as they are distinguishable from the other definitions with the same name (for property definitions, this means the type must be different; for child node definitions, this means the required primary types attribute). There are a number of places where the logic is expecting a single property definition (or child definition) given a node type and a definition name. This is obviously flawed. Also, our logic to select the "best" property definition or "best" child node definition doesn't seem to be correct, in that it tends to favor less-restricted definitions that are lower in the type hierarchy rather than very good matching definitions higher in the type hierarchy.

DNA's NodeTypeManager implementation does not allow multiple definitions with the same name ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Key: DNA-335 URL: https://jira.jboss.org/jira/browse/DNA-335 Project: DNA Issue Type: Bug Components: JCR Affects Versions: 0.3 Reporter: Randall Hauch Assignee: Randall Hauch Fix For: 0.4 Attachments: dna-335-definitionsWithSameName.patch, DNA-335_clean_type_source.patch, DNA-335_overriding_definitions.patch The JCR Specification (version 1.0.1) does not preclude that there may be multiple property definitions with the same name, or that there may be multiple child definitions with the same name. JCR 1.0 (version 1.0.1) DOES say that there may be multiple residual definitions with the same name. However, the draft version of the JSR-283 specification does have a new section 4.7.15 that specifically addresses and allows multiple definitions with the same name, as long as they are distinguishable from the other definitions with the same name (for property definitions, this means the type must be different; for child node definitions, this means the required primary types attribute). There are a number of places where the logic is expecting a single property definition (or child definition) given a node type and a definition name. This is obviously flawed. Also, our logic to select the "best" property definition or "best" child node definition doesn't seem to be correct, in that it tends to favor less-restricted definitions that are lower in the type hierarchy rather than very good matching definitions higher in the type hierarchy.