Michael Wechner wrote:
Jörn Nettingsmeier wrote:
Andreas Hartmann wrote:
Josias Thoeny schrieb:
<snip>
IMO these concerns are valid. They can certainly be solved from
the developer's point of view, but usability is a different story.
What do the others think?
i think that lenya has too many real problems right now to think about
virtual ones. there should be one canonical site structure, period.
(it may even be flat).
I guess by the canonical site structure you mean the repository
structure, right?
well, yes and no. my gut feeling is:
* let's have one URL space that reflects how the content is actually
organized, i.e. if a page has children, have a sub-directory (for fs
storage) or sub-nodes (in the case of jcr etc.). this is the "canonical"
structure.
* alternate site structures (pages from a-z or customizable pages à la
"my xyz.com") are *presentation*, not *content*, and should thus not be
reflected in the URI space or in storage layout, only in the navigation.
the reason i care about "storage layout" (or "repository structure") at
all - even though it is hidden from the user - is that i like the
feeling to be able to bypass the cms for automated search/replace
editing or other clever things that i want to do which the cms
developers have not anticipated.
aside: that's why i'm not terribly excited about jcr. i can see how sexy
it is and how many problems it solves in the long run, but it takes the
power of the unix command line away from me.
--
"Open source takes the bullshit out of software."
- Charles Ferguson on TechnologyReview.com
--
Jörn Nettingsmeier, EDV-Administrator
Institut für Politikwissenschaft
Universität Duisburg-Essen, Standort Duisburg
Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED], Telefon: 0203/379-2736
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
