Yes, it looks like the same idea as Jackrabbit / JCR. I hope they've done their homework and understood the advantages and limitations of that API. I always found it a pain to work with, and that's probably the reason it never took off.
I really, really hope they succeed, but they've bitten off a difficult problem. It's not hard to design a simple content management API. What's hard is making it general enough to handle many situations without getting too complex.
Yes, the JCR spec is not easy to implement. But with a mature implementation, you can create your CMS convention driven. Those conventions can be as narrow as you need for a simple CMS. And when you want offer more, you are not limited by the content repository but only by your conventions, which you can widen at any time. I hope, more people will look to JCR as an option, because it solves the content repository problem very well.
Comments
Yes, it looks like the same idea as Jackrabbit / JCR. I hope they've done their homework and understood the advantages and limitations of that API. I always found it a pain to work with, and that's probably the reason it never took off.
I really, really hope they succeed, but they've bitten off a difficult problem. It's not hard to design a simple content management API. What's hard is making it general enough to handle many situations without getting too complex.
Yes, the JCR spec is not easy to implement. But with a mature implementation, you can create your CMS convention driven. Those conventions can be as narrow as you need for a simple CMS. And when you want offer more, you are not limited by the content repository but only by your conventions, which you can widen at any time. I hope, more people will look to JCR as an option, because it solves the content repository problem very well.