[Zope-PTK] Improving the PTK reviewing system

H.A. greyfolk@usa.net
Mon, 10 Apr 2000 19:16:33 -0700

On Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 04:05:18PM -0400, Mike Pelletier wrote:
>   As I mentioned in passing in the previous list item, I'm interested
> in improving PTK's reviewing system.  I would like it to be possible
> to share content with specific classes of members, rather than
> everyone or noone.  If you are interested, please take a moment to
> read (and possibly comment on) this wiki:
> 	http://www.zope.org/Products/PTK/ZWiki/ReviewRevamp
>   'Revamp' is a bit extreme.  I realized I could do what I wanted
> without tearing everything apart after I had named the page.
>   If no one says anything, I will assume everyone adores the idea and
> is in full support.


I just read the ReviewRevamp page and I would like to 'complain'! Actually
I am a newbie and just discovered Zope and PTK a month ago, so I didn't
dare to complain 8-) (in case the world knows that I don't know what I'm
talking about).

I'm currently trying to understand Zope and have been busy creating Products,
but this MemberClass implementation has been buzzing in my head. I'm thinking 
of creating Service Classes (by Portal permission objects and mapping class
instantiation permission and class methods permission to one of these 
permission, and then mapping Portal-
wide roles [Member Classes] to the Portal permissions, and voila, I have 
Service Classes and Member Classes).

Then I want users to be able to create something like ACL groups (Local
Roles?) and modify 'friends' in these Local Roles. I'm thinking of just
creating method interfaces to modify Local Roles and assign the new roles
to one of the Portal permissions defined for class methods so 'friends' in the
new roles can access some methods. I haven't tried these but that's what I'm 
thinking right now.

With regard to assumptions in ReviewRevamp, I can imagine where users in, 
e.g., Technical Support dept. would like to make a document available to the
Customer Service people so they can reply end-users questions etc. And I
think there are more general cases where sharing to other role groups 
(without belonging to those groups) is
desirable. Bullets 2 and 3 look reasonable to me, though there might be some
cases where reviewers might need to re-review items.

So I think it's nice to have Portal-wide Member Classes and also user-
defined Member Classes (through Local Roles). I'm not sure if this is too
specific to the things I plan to do. Sorry if I write too much and doubly
sorry if I misunderstood roles and permissions in Zope. I'm still working
on it.