-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On Sep 14, 2008, at 12:26 , yuppie wrote: > This mail has been lying around for a while because I'm not sure it's > the right way to start the discussion. But now I'll give it a try. > Maybe > the sprinters find some time to discuss this: We're down to 2 at this point and I need to take off very soon, so here's a very quick assessment from Tres and me: > b) for URLs like http://www.example.org/guestbook/+/Message > > The '+' view already implements IPublishTraverse, so we can't change > traversal using an adapter. The only solution I can see is to replace > the '+' view by a customized version. This looks like a good solution. I believe Zope 3 uses the same or a similar style. > 3.) For which context should we register the add views? > ------------------------------------------------------- > > The add views will depend on special portal type handling done by the > traverser. So we register the add views for traverser? > > Or should all views have a default portal type that is used if we > access > add views directly? In that case we would register the add view for > the > container. I'm not sure, hoping for comments from others. > plone.dexterity[3] uses an @@add-dexterity-content traverser, but I > don't think product names like dexterity or cmf should be visible in > URLs. Those are implementation details that should be transparent > for users. I agree. jens -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (Darwin) iEYEARECAAYFAkjM7HQACgkQRAx5nvEhZLKPOACgpWQjPFL9o0Fng8WtLMSPRfSZ 3ZEAoJoWo0XGe00MXNwI2+aLmsYRxm6L =Scef -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ Zope-CMF maillist - Zope-CMF@lists.zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-cmf See https://bugs.launchpad.net/zope-cmf/ for bug reports and feature requests
