[Zope-CMF] CMF 1.4 Roadmap

[seb bacon]

We have been using a home-grown solution to the compound question in 
production for nearly 2 years now, and I keep promising to release it. 
It is sufficiently generic to solve all sorts of

 > 1. Building a single web page out of multiple content objects

type problems.  I have never had time to release it because it, too, is 
very bound up in customer work and would take a while to extract.

The short description: a 'page' is folderish.  'components' are existing 
Types inside the page, or other pages.  The page uses templates to 
display the components.  The components decide how to display themselves 
depending on a 'slots' definition in the page.  For example, I create a 
'HomePage' page; I go to its 'slots' tab; I add 'text_1' and 'image_1' 
components into the slots; I declare that when I use the 'view' action 
on the HomePage, I should display the components' 'view_component' 
action; and when I use the 'edit' action, I should use the components' 
'edit_component' action.  I can also define slots' default content when 
they are added, and metadata.

However, I am hopeful that I could at least extract the core of it and 
post some TODO notes which someone else could take up, if they have 
time.  I will make a special effort to start to do that in the next 2 
weeks (hmm, I've said that before...)

Therefore it is unlikely to make it into a 1.4.

However, I would strongly urge people to wait and see mine or Jeffrey's 
solutions before going ahead with this.  It is an important issue and 
it's worth getting right.

Seb

Paul Winkler wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 20, 2003 at 06:09:15PM -0700, Jeffrey P Shell wrote:
> 
>>I have one, but it's in such bad shape.
> 
> 
> Thanks, I already have that. ;)
> 
> 
>>I'm not too sure how some would like it - some people 
>>prefer compound documents to be folderish.  I went a different route 
>>and went towards an OpenDoc inspired model of Documents (the abstract 
>>shell) containing Parts/PartContainers.  It's an approach that works 
>>decently with through-the-web complex document editing, but not 
>>terribly well with FTP or other means.  Basically - I'm not sure if my 
>>solution is generic enough for inclusion with the CMF (and it builds on 
>>its own complex framework that would need cleaning).
> 
> 
> hmmm, not sure. Is this like the way CMFArticle has Elements
> (bits of a page) and optional Sub-Articles (different pages
> of the same article)?
> 
> One thing I am convinced of from using CMFArticle is that
> these problems are orthogonal, and should be addressed separately.
> That is:
> 
> 1. Building a single web page out of multiple content objects. 
> 
> 2. Building a (from user's POV) single content object
> that consists of multiple web pages. e.g. the articles
> on oreillynet.com and bazillions of other sites.