Thanks for the quick responses. A dexterity content type, you mean?
No, not exactly. This is a long term goal of course. What I'd create is a generic content type that the save data adapter would always use. So it'd be a pseudo proxy type of the actually form and behave like a regular archetype object using the schema from the pfg form. What 'type' is the resulting content item? This would always use the same Archetype type. So it's not an auto-generated one or anything. It would just dynamically generate it's own schema from the pfg form. What determines the 'view' template for the ad-hoc content item? It'd just use default views, but you could always add extra views on your own. Can you explain a little more how this differs (and is presumably better) > than the 'manual' equivalent: > > <http://plone.org/products/ploneformgen/documentation/how-to/creating-content-from-pfg> > http://plone.org/products/ploneformgen/documentation/how-to/creating-content-from-pfg The use case is different from actually generating the real content type. If you're interested in that, check out uwosh.northstar. That would generate an archetype type with pfg using zopeskel. I know the long term goal of unifying our schemaeditor for zope schema generation so you can easily use them with pfg, dexterity, etc. This is just a really simple alternative in the meantime for cases where you don't really need a full-fledged type and any extra customization can be done with TTW page template view and placeful workflows. Does that clear up everything? -Nathan On Fri, Jul 23, 2010 at 11:39 AM, David Hostetler <[email protected]>wrote: > Just seeing if I understand this right.. > > Basically this would allow a PFG instance to take on the role of the edit > form for an ad-hoc content type? > > Whereas the edit form for content types is provided automatically by > Archetypes or via a hand-crafted .pt, this allows the form itself to be a > PFG object. And furthermore, the PFG object becomes the source of the > definition of the schema of the resulting target content instance. > > What 'type' is the resulting content item? > > What determines the 'view' template for the ad-hoc content item? > > > > Sounds interesting. Can you explain a little more how this differs (and > is presumably better) than the 'manual' equivalent: > > > http://plone.org/products/ploneformgen/documentation/how-to/creating-content-from-pfg > > > thanks! > > -David > > > > > On Fri, Jul 23, 2010 at 12:20, Nathan Van Gheem <[email protected]>wrote: > >> Hello All, >> >> I'm interested in writing a save data adapter for ploneformgen that saves >> the data to an actual content type. It'd just take the fields from the >> ploneformgen form for it's schema. I find that in some cases, a user just >> wants a persistent form and it seems foolish to write a packaged content >> type for each one. >> >> The advantages being: >> >> - can use collections to query results if some of the dublin core meta >> data is available >> - can apply placeful workflows to content type >> - users can comment on form >> - easier to manage data after >> >> One possible snag is if a user removes a field or renames it, there might >> be data loss. >> >> I'm posting this here because I'm interested in hearing what others think >> of the idea, if it's already done, or if I'm just being foolish before I >> write a product for it. >> >> >> Thanks, >> Nathan >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Product-Developers mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/product-developers >> >> >
_______________________________________________ Product-Developers mailing list [email protected] http://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/product-developers
