[Zope-CMF] Re: modifying TypeInformation's properties

[Jean-Marc Orliaguet]

yuppie wrote:

> Hi!
>
>
> Florent Guillaume wrote:
>
>>> Maybe special kinds of types should have their own Type Information 
>>> class?
>>
>>
>> Why ? The TypeInformation classes are implementation details about the
>> type. The should not constrain how the TI is used, and should be
>> interchangeable.
>>
>>> Factory-based Type Information and Scriptable Type Information are 
>>> made for ordinary content types.
>>
>>
>> I don't know what you mean by that. They are made to construct CMF 
>> types.
>
>
Hi

> CMF *content* types. If I understand the concept of portlets right, 
> they are *presentation* objects. Sometimes its useful to use different 
> classes for different kinds of objects. Don't know if that's the best 
> solution in this case.


Portlets are 100% content objects, not presentation objects, but they 
are not documents either..

Then we have CMF types that are definitely not content types such as 
styles, layout modifiers, page blocks, .... These are 100% presentation 
objects, but the underlying logic is the same as with any other CMF type

we have made a clear separation between content and presentation objects 
- see: 
http://cvs.nuxeo.org/cgi-bin/viewcvs.cgi/CPS3/CPSSkins/doc/CPS3-Integration.txt?rev=1.3&content-type=text/vnd.viewcvs-markup

The current FTI in CMF is designed for document types mainly - for 
instance there is a 'discussion alllowed' property which only make sense 
in the context of a document or something that can be added comments 
too. So the current issue is about making it more flexible so that it 
does not make too many assumptions about the type of objects that it 
holds information about.

Regards /JM