[Zope-CMF] Re: Permalinks in CMF 1.5 (CMFDefault)

[Andrew Sawyers]

yuppie wrote:

> Hi!
> 
> 
> Gregoire Weber wrote:
> 
>>> Adding UID based aliases for content items introduced many problems. 
>>> As long as these issues are not resolved I don't like to have 
>>> permalinks in the 'Basic' skin.
>>
>>
>> Ok, I could aggree. What about puting logic into a PyScript and
>> circumvent the tal:on-error hack?
> 
> 
> Not sure I understand what you propose. With "introduced problems" I 
> don't mean the implementation details, but issues like broken relative 
> links and confusing navigation.
> 
>>> But what about adding a second ZPT skin? I think the DTML skins 
>>> should be removed after CMF 1.5. If people agree, we would anyway 
>>> need another ZPT skin to show the skin switching feature. An 
>>> 'Experimental' skin that shows some concepts that aren't mature or 
>>> don't fit into the 'Basic' skin could be quite useful.
>>
>>
>> Could CMFUrlSkinSwitcher be a candidate or a base of your "skins 
>> switcher feature"?
> 
> 
> It seems I wasn't clear enough. I just meant the already built in ways 
> to switch skins. If we remove the DTML skins, there is only one skin left.
> 
> So all I was talking about is:
> - adding a new skin folder with the 2 files you modified
> - adding a new skin in setupDefaultSkins
> 
>> Another question: Who is currently *really* using the CMFDefault skin?
> 
> 
> Me ;)
> 
> If you don't need a sexy and feature loaded community site, CMFDefault 
> has some advantages over CPS or Plone:
> 
> - it's leaner and faster
> - it depends only on Zope
> - it has a more flexible license
> 
> And last but not least: It's easier to work on the CMF if you use it.
> 
> 
> Cheers,
>     Yuppie
> 


Tres and I have had some pretty heated discussions in the past about 
skins.  I'm not sure his position today, but I'd be interested in seeing 
what kind of traction an independent skin project might come up with 
(i.e. no expectations outside the framework).  I have a designer who 
claims he can step up - but regardless, the look and feel of things has 
always been important to me - a nicer and option skin might be worth 
looking at adding after 1.5?

On a related note, one thing that's always surprised me is the lack of 
skins from the community - many other skinnable frameworks and 
applications have thriving skinning initiatives.  I'm curious why we 
don't and what might be the cause of that?

Andrew
-- 
Zope Corporation
Software Engineer
(540) 361-1700