+1 for keeping the field but removing the catalog and leaving it up to individual products to make use of the field and store the result.
My main concern is the suggestion is / was to remove the field, good idea to move it inline with the other metadata though. Peace Wyn On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 10:53 AM, Wichert Akkerman <[email protected]> wrote: > On 08/05/2011 09:50 AM, w.p.w wrote: > >> "People use it to store coordinates, names of places, descriptions of >> places, etc." would this not tend to suggest that its usage needs better >> defining and expanding or complementing its usage rather then removing it as >> not fit ? >> > > There are valid reasons for all ways of using it, and trying to standardise > on a single way to use the field is not going to work. So you either have a > field that does not have a well-defined meaning, or you need multiple > location fields for all different syntax types. My suggestions is to just > keep Plone core simple and leave this to specific sites or add-on products > that know how they need to use a location field. That also opens up the > ability for people to do things like use a geo-index for the location field > in sites, making it really useful. > > Wichert. > >
_______________________________________________ Product-Developers mailing list [email protected] https://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/plone-product-developers
