[Zope-CMF] Multilingual site with CMF/Plone?

Erik Lange erik@digitalforbruger.dk
Wed, 12 Feb 2003 23:10:55 +0100

At 05:17 PM 2/12/03, Paul Winkler wrote:
>On Wed, Feb 12, 2003 at 10:53:22AM +0100, Erik Lange wrote:
> > >> Well, if the CMF is ugly / broken / incorrect or doesn't do what we 
> want,
> > >> I'm sure your suggestion or improvements will be appreciated.
> > >
> > >CMF Default != CMF
> >
> > Hmm.. did I say anything about CMF Default above ?
>Yes.  "if the CMF is ugly" implies CMFDefault, because
>CMFCore does not look like anything.

Sorry, that was not what I meant.. I'm aware of the difference ;-)

The statement "if the CMF is ugly / broken / incorrect or doesn't do what 
we want" is a quote from one of Andy's ealier posts... anyway, I still 
believe suggestions or improvements will be appriciated, both for CMF Core 
and CMF Default.

But chosing another path - i.e. devoloping an alternative CMF 
implementation - is ofcourse also a valid way to go.

What I'm trying to say is, that most people aren't aware that Plone has 
chosen another path, and therefore aren't aware of the difference between 
the CMF Default implementaion and Plone's implementation.

If Plone really is going in another direction, I think this should be made 
clear and documented, so it doesn't come as a suprise to new users, when 
they are trying to use products that are bulid "the old fashion way". Plone 
started out being just a skin for CMF - now it's a hole new CMF 
implementation,  but is still seen as some nice looking skins and some 
ekstra functions to the raw standard CMF.

Just look at the subject of this thread: "... CMF/Plone" implies, that 
there is no difference in the implementation, and that's (IMHO) the big 
misunderstanding among new Zopistas, and that's what I'm trying to bring to 
these new Zope/CMF users attention, when I see it. That's all I'm saying - 
okay ?

Kind regards,
Erik Lange