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

[seb bacon]

On Wed, 2002-04-10 at 05:05, Tim Hoffman wrote:
> My problem is it seemed that it wasn't clear what meta_type and Type 
> should have been
> and when you define them through types tool vs basic Class definitions 
> in a Product,
> and in fact I think we have implemented it around the wrong way around, 
> and so skinned folders
> work one way and some other stuff is the other way (ie use of Type and 
> meta_type)

I agree.

For me, the biggest problem has always been this:

    def Type(self):
        """
            Return the "human readable" type name (note that it
            may not map exactly to the 'meta_type', e.g., for
            l10n/i18n or where a single content class is being
            used twice, under different names.
        """
        if self.title:
            return self.title
        else:
            return self.getId()

It has two bad effects:

1) Type can come from two different sources, which leads to unexpected
effects
2) The Type is labelled 'Title' in the UI, which is misleading

I think there should be a 'Type' field separate from the 'Title' field,
and the Title can be treated as UI and the Type as application logic.

seb


> >>> 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 ;-)
> >
> >
> > I think I'm late in this thread, but I'm inclined to agree with 
> > Florent.  I've learned from recent customer work that DC "Type" has a 
> > meaning in people's minds that doesn't necessarily correspond with 
> > CMF's definition.
> >