[Zope-CMF] Re: [dev] CMF 2.0 browser views and Five traversal

[yuppie]

Hi Jens!


Jens Vagelpohl wrote:
>> - We need new names for the views. I'd like to use @@view.html, 
>> @@edit.html and @@properties.html for the views that already exist. I 
>> think 'metadata_edit_form' and 'folder_edit_form' are both in fact 
>> properties views and 'folder_contents' is just a special edit view. 
>> I'd like to use the same names for container views as for content views.
> 
> Love the proposal, hate the "@@" naming. Do we need that? Or is the goal 
> to align better with the Zope 3 way of naming views? I'd like a simple 
> "index.html" or "edit.html" etc much better.

For now I just propose to use the '@@' names internally. The users will 
still see the old names, the Method Aliases machinery maps them to the 
new names.

For example this profile XML is for the Document aliases:

<?xml version="1.0"?>
<object name="Document">
  <alias from="(Default)" to="@@view.html"/>
  <alias from="view" to="@@view.html"/>
  <alias from="document_view" to="@@view.html"/>
  <alias from="document_edit_form" to="@@edit.html"/>
  <alias from="metadata_edit_form" to="@@properties.html"/>
</object>

You could access the edit view with 'edit.html' instead of 
'@@edit.html', but that has a major drawback: View names are not 
protected in any way if used without '@@'. You can easily screw up your 
site by adding content with the ID 'edit.html'.

Names used by Method Aliases are protected *and* Method Aliases are 
looked up first. So it would be safe to define an 'edit.html' alias for 
'document_edit_form' or '@@edit.html'. I actually do that on my sites.

But changing the visible names is not part of my proposal.


Cheers,

	Yuppie