Chris Kent wrote: ...snip...8<...
This works perfectly, but I would like to remove the options to dmHTML, dmFalsh, dmCSS, dmInclude from a Group of contributor users, just allowing them to create dmNavigation, dmNews, dmLinks, dmEvents, dmImage and dmFile. These options will still remain for other users who have access to the tree....snip...8<...
I have looked through all the policy group permissions, but can not see one that will allow me to restrict these types by Policy Group.
I do not wish to change core to archive this. Does anyone have any suggestions.
I don't think we ever envisaged this sort of use. The tree permissions work on a pretty clever inheritence model that is really designed to allow contributors with access the ability to add whatever content types. The point is to restrict where they can contribute and not what. You can of course require another group to approve that content.
Your effectively saying you want a permission that allows different groups access to see certain content types in the tree, in addition to the permission to create/edit/approve. Can you explain from a "use case" point why you need this?
Would one of your contributors potentially beable to add dmNews in one section of the tree but then not in another? Or is this an all or nothing permmisson on the content type?
Can you clarify why you are getting contributors to add news through the tree and not through the use of standard News Admin and publishing rules?
Apologies for all the questions -- it's important for our team to understand what motivates developers to change the way things were originally designed. We trying to work out if we're not communicating enough or if the code base needs to be changed.
-- geoff http://www.daemon.com.au/
--- You are currently subscribed to farcry-dev as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
MXDU2004 + Macromedia DevCon AsiaPac + Sydney, Australia http://www.mxdu.com/ + 24-25 February, 2004
