Hi Yuppie,
yuppie-4 wrote: > >> I don't suppose there's a way to make all FTI's expose actions, and just >> construct an appropriate fallback URL (e.g. createObject or whatever) if >> no >> add view has been specified? That'd mean folder_factories could just loop >> through the actions. > > Not sure I understand what you propose. folder_factories is a form that > allows to specify type and ID. I don't think we should ask for the ID > *before* showing the add view. And if we have no add view, we need > folder_factories' ID input field. > Ah.... In Plone, folder_factories is a list of addable types. You click "Add" next to each one and it's created with a temporary ID. Then you save it, and it's renamed to a better ID, usually. > But this might work: If we also implement the traverser, the traverser > could return a default add view that just asks for the ID. In that case > we could use actions for newstyle and oldstyle types. > That may be nice. > That solution would change the add procedure for oldstyle types, but > maybe that's better than listing newstyle and oldstyle types in two > different places. > I think so. Why should the user have to know whether something is "old" or "new"? Martin -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/-dev--more-add-menu-changes-tp18867664p18875455.html Sent from the Zope - CMF list2 mailing list archive at Nabble.com. _______________________________________________ Zope-CMF maillist - Zope-CMF@lists.zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-cmf See http://collector.zope.org/CMF for bug reports and feature requests
