yuppie wrote: > Hi Martin! > > > Martin Aspeli wrote: >> [...] >> >> Let's consider a type Alpha that has a custom add form registered as >> such a (context, request, fti) adapter with name "Alpha". fti.factory is >> "Alpha", and there's a corresponding IFactory utility (with name "Alpha"). >> >> Now, let's say I want to create a new type Beta (e.g. by copying the FTI >> object TTW), based on Alpha. I want this to use Alpha's add form, but >> construct objects with portal_type Beta. >> >> Is this possible? If I set Beta's fti.factory to be something other than >> "Alpha", then it won't find the add view, but if fti.factory is "Alpha" >> then the objects constructed will use Alpha's factory. > > You should be able to register the same add view twice. One registration > for the name "Alpha" and one for the name "Beta".
Sure. I was thinking more about the case of customising by copying the FTI TTW. >> I can't quite decide whether this is a problem in real life or not, >> although it does seem a bit strange that the add view adapter name and >> the factory utility name have to be the same. >> >> Would it make sense to decouple these, e.g. with a new "add_view_name" >> property? > > If people really have that problem we can decouple this later. For now I > can't see a need. I suspect it's YAGNI since the add view calls _setPortalTypeName() on the newly created instance as well, so the resulting object will have type Beta, not type Alpha. Martin -- Author of `Professional Plone Development`, a book for developers who want to work with Plone. See http://martinaspeli.net/plone-book _______________________________________________ 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