16 Dec
2008
16 Dec
'08
11:03 a.m.
On Dec 16, 2008, at 10:50 AM, Eduard Moraru wrote:
[snip]
P.S.: From what I asked around, it seems that
attachments are not
objects. That seems weird to me because, intuitively, the attachments
should be objects on a page of the class Attachment. On attachments
you
have versioning, meta-data and an attachment can exist on a page or
not,
the behaviour of an object. Could anybody explain the reason for this
please?
I think I agree (need to think more of consequences). Probably
historical reason. Attachments have a separate store but we could
generalize this to let objects have an optional separate store too.
Something to keep in mind when we redesign the model.
Ludovic, any input from you on this?
Thanks
-Vincent