I have some difficulties to understand myself too... :) Anyway I was just trying to sort the ideas out on this issue.
This thread will go on only in the developers-list to reduce the noise. Regards, Enzo > I have to say I barely understood any of your posting, but yes, I'd also > like something a little more flexible than just a flat list of keywords. > I believe I can restrict which keywords can be applied to particular > content types already, but that doesn't help within content types. > > I have occasionally felt that it would be useful to have a tree of > keywords available so that users don't have to scroll through a list of > irelevant keywords. In my case, a tree of two levels would probably > suffice. > > Peter Shute > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on : > >> PROPOSAL >> The main goal is to provide a complete overwrite of the >> classification part with a completely fresh new architecture >> able to satisfy the most use cases emerged in recent years. >> Obviously the Dublin Core Metadata Set has to be taken in >> consideration as usual. A true semantic classification of >> contents should coincide with the DC:subject, indeed. We can >> mix the tagging mechanism with a more structured one without >> loosing the user centric approach. _______________________________________________ Product-Developers mailing list Product-Developers@lists.plone.org http://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/product-developers
