Yeah, Wait a minute...
Emmanuel I think you are onto something. I was trying to talk myself out of needing groups, and I think you are right. Roles and aggregated roles are just aggregated permissions. So if I want to assign these to more than one user, I still need groups...perhaps aggregated groups...right...? So if we have groups...and aggregated groups... and roles and aggregated roles we cover all the bases right? Cheers, Ole --- Emmanuel Lecharny <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Ole Ersoy a écrit : > > >OK - So if we have aggregate roles / hierarchical > >roles, we can elliminate the concept of groups. > > > >Groovy. > > > > > > > AFAIK, groups are very cool to have if you deal with > more than one > application. Roles will be Application related, and > groups will be more > Users related. > > Those two elements are pretty close, but their > semantics are different, > if I understand. > > Emmanuel > ____________________________________________________________________________________ Any questions? Get answers on any topic at www.Answers.yahoo.com. Try it now.
