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:c.duncan@nlada.org] Sent: Wednesday, March 06, 2002 12:02 PM To: sean.upton@uniontrib.com; Eric.Roby@noaa.gov; zope-dev@zope.org Subject: Re: [Zope-dev] Zope 2.6 and OrderedFolders On Wednesday 06 March 2002 02:49 pm, sean.upton@uniontrib.com 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 c.duncan@nlada.org \---------------------------------------------------/