Ideas for Discussable ( was Re: [Zope-CMF] Question on Disscusable Content Types)

[seb bacon]

OK, not sure I entirely understand your proposal; but since I may end
up implementing it sooner, I better had :-)  In particular, I'm a bit
of a catalog newbie, and I don't know much about Brains...

Anyway, here's my understanding:

You propose to create a tree-like structure inside a purpose-built
tool, with each node containing a reference to an object.

This means the actual objects themselves can be stored anywhere in the
CMF instance, regardless of their context within a thread.

If I search my site for "gleet" and a discussion item is returned, how
is its thread context discovered from the discussion tool?  Is the
discussion tool a Catalog?

Do you envisage any object being threaded, or a particular discussion
Type, or a discussion mixin for other types?

>    path               - the Path of the object this node refers to. Is there 
>                         any reason why it would be bad to store a real object 
>                         ref here? ie: self.path = anobject?

can't see why not, myself.

Am I barking up the correct tree, or not?

seb

* Chris Withers <chrisw@nipltd.com> [010626 15:38]:
> Shane Hathaway wrote:
> > 
> > I expected you would.  The portal_discussions tool isn't as smart as it
> > should be.  All we ask is that you keep the process open by telling us
> > what you think should change (and why).  And publish interfaces.
> 
> Well, here's what I got so far...
> 
> I want to store the discussion structure in the discussion tool rather than
> hanging it off the content object, although the talkback attribute might still
> provide a useful hook into the right bit.
> 
> Catalog meta_data actually sparked off the idea.
> 
> The discussion structure would be stored by a tree of very lightweight objects,
> something like the following (which feels very similar to ZCatalog brains to me,
> but tree rather than table based):
> 
> class Node
> 
>    children attribute - stores references to other Node objects in a list
>    parents attribute  - likewise, but for parents

>    path               - the Path of the object this node refers to. Is there 
>                         any reason why it would be bad to store a real object 
>                         ref here? ie: self.path = anobject?

> 
>    *metadata*         - TTW configurable
> 
> I was planning to have a BTree mapping object paths to Nodes, but I wonder if
> the talkback attribute could be used to store a direct reference instead? Again,
> why would this be bad? Unfortunate cyclic references excepted (does Zope 2.4 fix
> this?)
> 
> At the moment, this will all be kicked off by direct calls to the discussion
> tool in methods like discussion_reply_edit and the like. Obviosuly, I can't wait
> for the PortalEvents tool so this can be doen mroe gracefully.
> 
> Lemme know what you think :-)
> 
> cheers,
> 
> Chris
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Zope-CMF maillist  -  Zope-CMF@zope.org
> http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-cmf
> 
> See http://www.zope.org/Products/PTK/Tracker for bug reports and feature requests

-- 

   [] j a m k i t 
           
        seb bacon
T:  020 7749 7218
F:  020 7739 8683
M:  07968 301 336
W: www.jamkit.com