From: "Florent Guillaume" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> - I really don't like the term groups or workgroups for what you have,
> because I see them as mappings between two kinds of concepts (the
> users and the roles) whereas groups implies only one kind of thing.
Well, they are collections of user,
Ok, this matches what I expected.
Here's some nitpicking :)
- I really don't like the term groups or workgroups for what you have,
because I see them as mappings between two kinds of concepts (the
users and the roles) whereas groups implies only one kind of thing.
- For the Blacklist part,
Lennart Regebro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hmm, yeah, thats true, it would be possible to have both, even though they
> aim to solve the same problem.
> Wouldn't it be a bit confusing to have both? Too may different ways of
> giving a person a role.
The use cases are somewhat different though.
Quite interesting, thanks.
I only browsed it quickly.
Their workflow model is, unsurprisingly, the standard task-oriented one.
Their formalization of workflow messages could be very useful to us.
Florent
Richard Volpato <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I came across the following from I
Since I'm not good at explaining how I think Zopes groups and roles should
work, I have decided to show you instead:
The patch is availible at http://www.zope.org/Members/regebro/workgroups/ .
Just zip it up in the Products directory and restart. I won't be held
responsible for anything even if i
Hi,
I came across the following from Interwoven regarding the exposing of the
components of content management systems as web services.
http://www.interwoven.com/company/standards/content-services/
It is an entirely language neutral formulation. Seems to me to offer (in
its 50 pages) a frame
