[Zope-CMF] Re: Our CMF-CMS Demo (LONG!)

[seb bacon]

* Grégoire Weber <gregoire.weber@switzerland.org> [010705 14:51]:
> > [...] but with the ability to tweak them if necessary.
> I'am not a fan of letting 'normal' users tweak their layout.
> Most of them never use it and the rest of them missuse it 
> (akward colours, etc.) to show to others the could 'program'
> a new colour. :-( This kind of persons usualy destroy the
> consistence of a site.

I enthusiatically agree with this (nodding head vigorously).  In our
applications at least, I don't anticipate a need for anyone to create
templates but the original developers & designers.  There's a reason
for the client paying someone else to do their design / usability:
it's not their area of expertise.  Fewer choices, chosen carefully,
enforces a consistent look and feel and makes the clients'
content-managing lives simpler and hopefully more intuitive.

> > [...] different sections of your site can have different layouts and
> > colour-schemes, but you can still inherit things like headers or news-box
> > from higher up, giving some consistent elemnts across all your
> > "sub-portals".
> This seems to me to be an important idea. We should note this as 
> a requirement for "the spec" we write (possibly)!

How does the skins philosophy fit into this?  As gregoire and ken have
pointed out... 

> IMHO it is important to have different concepts of content storage and 
> content retrieving structures. If I've understood klm's proposal
> (http://cmf.zope.org/rqmts/proposals/OrganizationObjects) 
> right it's that what he's saying also.

...the folder containment metaphor / structure is very limited.  IMO,
it's probably a good thing to get away from this paradigm, though
aquisition / inheritance needs to be addressed in any other
implementation, if possible.

seb