I just want to voice my support: Keep it simple. On Mar 30, 2007, at 13:35, Sean Cribbs wrote:
> That list is just what I have collected from Radiant's core-team > Basecamp. > > Re: Abstract Content Model - Doubtful. I understand the conceptual > reasons behind the abstraction of content; however, I'm with John on > this one. There seems to be very little benefit for the amount of > indirection and complication that would be introduced. If we want > Radiant to maintain simplicity and clarity, I think we need to stay > away from becoming a content-management "framework" like ezPublish, > Plone, Xaraya, and many others. It's really just overkill for most > scenarios. > > When we evaluated ezPublish at KCKCC we started calling it > "hardPublish" -- there were too many barriers between us and the > content. And in the end, we wanted control of all of the output. > Radiant provided that for us. > > I guess what I'm saying is, I'm glad Radiant embraces constraints. > That makes it not fit in all scenarios, but if you need something > else, you should use it. Be pragmatic! > > Sean > > On 3/30/07, Jacob Burkhart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> From the presentation: >> >> 0.7 - Intaglio (Blogging) >> Comments, tagging >> Mars Edit support >> Convert from WordPress, Typo, Mephisto >> Robust import/export >> >> >> >> Oh? Where can I learn more? Is there a planned future release to >> address what's being discussed in the "Radiant replace Pages with >> Abstract Content Model" thread? _______________________________________________ Radiant mailing list Post: [email protected] Search: http://radiantcms.org/mailing-list/search/ Site: http://lists.radiantcms.org/mailman/listinfo/radiant
