Re: TF ZMI, was: RE: [Zope-dev] Zope 2.6 and OrderedFolders

2002-03-08 Thread Dieter Maurer

[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
  ...
  and that is add translucency (items
  are there, but obscured from view) to the UI layer - that is, the ability to
  VISUALLY unclutter different users' views of objects in a folder via ZMI;
  views could be stored per user.  
Not sure that I would be happy with this...

  I do not see the objects but they may interfere with my code
  (because acquisition returns these invisible objects and not my
  visible object higher above in the hierarchy).

  I fear lots of messages: Why do I get AttributeError when
  accessing my objects...


Dieter

___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )



TF ZMI, was: RE: [Zope-dev] Zope 2.6 and OrderedFolders

2002-03-07 Thread sean . upton

You know, the funny thing is that TF really accomplishes the goals of a
ZMI/UI-improvement hack (unclutter a view of a folder to VISUALLY separate
the software/content/presentation space) implemented, IMHO, in the wrong
place.  I would think there is another way that a Folder UI could be
uncluttered without the magic of TF, and that is add translucency (items
are there, but obscured from view) to the UI layer - that is, the ability to
VISUALLY unclutter different users' views of objects in a folder via ZMI;
views could be stored per user.  

For example, you could select ZSQL Methods and RDB connections in a folder
to be hidden from everybody but the Database programmer; you could keep
these and Python Scripts obscured from the view of a content person or
presentation designer, etc.  Well, they wouldn't be hidden, but visually
'compacted' and relegated to a small drop-down box at the bottom of the page
to unclutter it... so the standard tabled object list wouldn't iterate over
objectIds() or objectValues(), but instead a higher-level filter function.
A complimentary filter function would render the 'hidden' objects as a
sequence as well.


__ZMI manage_main Now:__

===\===\===\===\--- ZMI tabs
% :::===

TP.NAME. .SZ. ..LM..
[]--  --
[]--  --
[]--  --
[]--  --
[]--  --

[RN][CT][CP][DL][I/E][SA]  --- Buttons
for checked


__ZMI With Translucency:___

===\===\===\===\--- ZMI tabs
% :::===

TP.NAME. .SZ. ..LM..
[]--  --
[]--  --
[]--  --
[]--  --
[]--  --

[RN][CT][][][][][Hide] --- New HideBtn

Hidden Items:
[Select Item... [v]
[Open][Unhide][ViewAll]--- Buttons for
doing things
  ^ with hidden
  | items
  |
  +--- ViewAll =
pop-up new
window


This would be more visually convenient.  I'm thinking of trying to
monkey-patch OFS.Folder to just do this. 

Of course, with these kind of modifications, for any given folder, there's
no mandatate that anything need to be hidden at all.  Thoughts?

Sean

-Original Message-
From: Casey Duncan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, March 06, 2002 12:02 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [Zope-dev] Zope 2.6 and OrderedFolders


On Wednesday 06 March 2002 02:49 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] allegedly
wrote:
 Is this a suggestion that TF go into the core?  One other (major) problem
 with TF is that it breaks session tracking site-wide, or at least the
 ability to have more than one session id manager per Zope instance in CST;
 I'm not sure about sessions in Zope 2.5...

 TF seems to have too much normalcy-hijacking magic to go into the core, if
 you ask me...

 Sean

-1 on TF in the core. Nice hack, but too much magic and there are
significant 
performance implications if I remember correctly.

Also Zope 3 will render TF superfluous.

/---\
  Casey Duncan, Sr. Web Developer
  National Legal Aid and Defender Association
  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
\---/

___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )



Re: TF ZMI, was: RE: [Zope-dev] Zope 2.6 and OrderedFolders

2002-03-07 Thread Leonardo Rochael Almeida


On Thu, 2002-03-07 at 19:39, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 You know, the funny thing is that TF really accomplishes the goals of a
 ZMI/UI-improvement hack (unclutter a view of a folder to VISUALLY separate
 the software/content/presentation space) implemented, IMHO, in the wrong
 place.  I would think there is another way that a Folder UI could be
 uncluttered without the magic of TF, and that is add translucency (items
 are there, but obscured from view) to the UI layer - that is, the ability to
 VISUALLY unclutter different users' views of objects in a folder via ZMI;
 views could be stored per user.  
 
 [...]

Maybe you could have a 'Views' tab where you could configure groups of
filters where each filter would be configured like a 'Find Objects'
query. Then, in the 'Contents' tab you'd have buttons to switch between
those views and the default view, which show all objects.

-- 
Ideas don't stay in some minds very long because they don't like
solitary confinement.


___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )



Re: TF ZMI, was: RE: [Zope-dev] Zope 2.6 and OrderedFolders

2002-03-07 Thread Eric Roby

I think this is an excellent alternative to handle the UI aesthetics.  The
other part of this issue (for me) is the acquisition of these objects.  Even
if they are hanging out in the root, I would still like to be able to put
templates in a template folder, scripts in a scripts folder etc... and not
have to go through a great deal of fanfare to acquire them.  It would be
nice to be able to define mappings (or not) for the acquision process to
evaluate once the trail hits root and before it looks in REQUEST.  This
feature of TF is really nice (just dangerous).

Eric



 You know, the funny thing is that TF really accomplishes the goals of a
 ZMI/UI-improvement hack (unclutter a view of a folder to VISUALLY separate
 the software/content/presentation space) implemented, IMHO, in the wrong
 place.  I would think there is another way that a Folder UI could be
 uncluttered without the magic of TF, and that is add translucency (items
 are there, but obscured from view) to the UI layer - that is, the ability
to
 VISUALLY unclutter different users' views of objects in a folder via ZMI;
 views could be stored per user.

 For example, you could select ZSQL Methods and RDB connections in a folder
 to be hidden from everybody but the Database programmer; you could keep
 these and Python Scripts obscured from the view of a content person or
 presentation designer, etc.  Well, they wouldn't be hidden, but visually
 'compacted' and relegated to a small drop-down box at the bottom of the
page
 to unclutter it... so the standard tabled object list wouldn't iterate
over
 objectIds() or objectValues(), but instead a higher-level filter function.
 A complimentary filter function would render the 'hidden' objects as a
 sequence as well.


 __ZMI manage_main Now:__
 
 ===\===\===\===\--- ZMI tabs
 % :::===

 TP.NAME. .SZ. ..LM..
 []--  --
 []--  --
 []--  --
 []--  --
 []--  --

 [RN][CT][CP][DL][I/E][SA]  --- Buttons
 for checked


 __ZMI With Translucency:___
 
 ===\===\===\===\--- ZMI tabs
 % :::===

 TP.NAME. .SZ. ..LM..
 []--  --
 []--  --
 []--  --
 []--  --
 []--  --

 [RN][CT][][][][][Hide] --- New HideBtn
 
 Hidden Items:
 [Select Item... [v]
 [Open][Unhide][ViewAll]--- Buttons for
 doing things
   ^ with hidden
   | items
   |
   +--- ViewAll =
 pop-up new
 window
 

 This would be more visually convenient.  I'm thinking of trying to
 monkey-patch OFS.Folder to just do this.

 Of course, with these kind of modifications, for any given folder, there's
 no mandatate that anything need to be hidden at all.  Thoughts?

 Sean


___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )



[Zope-dev] Zope 2.6 and OrderedFolders

2002-03-06 Thread Eric Roby

I think OrderedFolders is a great product and should be in the core ...
but does this also mean that TransparentFolder will get those parts
(that Shane mentioned some time ago) optimized that kept it from making
it into the core before??  If so ... sounds like a win-win situation.


___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )



RE: [Zope-dev] Zope 2.6 and OrderedFolders

2002-03-06 Thread sean . upton

Is this a suggestion that TF go into the core?  One other (major) problem
with TF is that it breaks session tracking site-wide, or at least the
ability to have more than one session id manager per Zope instance in CST;
I'm not sure about sessions in Zope 2.5...

TF seems to have too much normalcy-hijacking magic to go into the core, if
you ask me...

Sean

-Original Message-
From: Eric Roby [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, March 06, 2002 10:56 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [Zope-dev] Zope 2.6 and OrderedFolders


I think OrderedFolders is a great product and should be in the core ...
but does this also mean that TransparentFolder will get those parts
(that Shane mentioned some time ago) optimized that kept it from making
it into the core before??  If so ... sounds like a win-win situation.


___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )

___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )



Re: [Zope-dev] Zope 2.6 and OrderedFolders

2002-03-06 Thread Casey Duncan

On Wednesday 06 March 2002 02:49 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] allegedly wrote:
 Is this a suggestion that TF go into the core?  One other (major) problem
 with TF is that it breaks session tracking site-wide, or at least the
 ability to have more than one session id manager per Zope instance in CST;
 I'm not sure about sessions in Zope 2.5...

 TF seems to have too much normalcy-hijacking magic to go into the core, if
 you ask me...

 Sean

-1 on TF in the core. Nice hack, but too much magic and there are significant 
performance implications if I remember correctly.

Also Zope 3 will render TF superfluous.

/---\
  Casey Duncan, Sr. Web Developer
  National Legal Aid and Defender Association
  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
\---/

___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )



Re: [Zope-dev] Zope 2.6 and OrderedFolders

2002-03-06 Thread Chris Withers

Casey Duncan wrote:
 
 Also Zope 3 will render TF superfluous.

As does the skins tool in the CMF.

I'm pretty sceptical on the whole OrderedFolder front too, IIRC, it does a lot
more than just provide ordered folders!

cheers,

Chris

___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )