[Zope-CMF] Types, meta_type, content_meta_type, etc...

[Chris Withers]

Florent Guillaume wrote:
> 
> Title is presentation.

...not when it's the title of a Type Information object as I already explained.

> DublinCore's Type is presentation.

...no it's not. DublinCore's Type is exactly the same as the CMF content type. I
don't see any reason for them to be different ;-)

> TypeInformation's Type is presentation.

huh? TypeInformation's type has already been explained to you. It is not
presentation, it is a mechanism that lets you have several content types based
on the same Zope metatype. This is vitally important and something you need to
understand ;-)

> portal_type is application logic.

This _is_ the TypeInformation's Type!

> TypeInformation's id is application logic.

TypeInformation's id means nothing on its own. The id of the TypeInfo object is
used to calculate its Type(), which I've already explained to you ;-)

> The fact that CMF uses Type for application logic is broken.

No, its essential.

> The fact that Title is confused with id is broken.

That I'm inclined to agree with, but I didn't make that call so I'm not prepared
to unmake it ;-) Tres? Shane?

> allowType should take a portal_type argument (i.e., TypeInformation's id).

...where did you get this notion of a portal_type from?

> The fact that allowedContentTypes does type checking on
>   contentType.Type() is broken.

...I beg to differ ;-) All type checking in the CMF is done on
contentType.Type()...

> The fact that allowed_content_type, which should be application
>   logic, stores things that are presentation, is broken.

Well, that's based on some other misconceptions which I hope I've cleared up...

> folder_factories needes to get allowed content types,
>  - for the user, thus presentation (in a non-English site
>    it's totally unacceptable to see "News Item"),

So rename the TypeInfo object ;-)

> The current behavior mixes the two in an inextricable manner that
> becomes apparent as soon as you go beyond the English language.

I'm not in favour of having yet another label attached to content types. Content
types (aka Type Info objects) are lightweight and simple, if you don't like what
they're called, rename them.

> Also
> there was no problem until Tres (at my suggestion) enforced content type
> filtering in invokeFactory, which only now reveals this deep mess
> (actually I've had to deal with it for some time now).

...there is no deep mess as far as I can see, you just need to configure your
site for the content types you have created.

cheers,

Chris - we will bite them on the features *grinz*