> In the "more": nodes have revisions. They have a body in the
> node_revisions table.
Yes, and AFAIK, there is already an effort to turn node_revisions into field
revisions, eliminating node_revisions. But then again, who says that a contrib
module implementing private messages (or whatever) has no use for revisions?
> What you are proposing is to implement a more generic "Drupal
> Object", of which the Node as we know it would be a
> particular version. That makes a lot of sense, and would
> allow us to also properly implement "set based lazy-loading" one day.
I'm not sure whether I would go that far. Was rather thinking that re-using
the schema of {node} along with the API for nodes would dramatically simplify a
lot of contrib modules and would "automatically" introduce the flexibility and
customizability of nodes. - Which also results in a much nicer DX experience,
because you wouldn't have to lookup, learn, and hook into countless of
node-alike implementations.
But, most probably, you are right. :)
sun
