Oliver Baltzer wrote: > Hmm, I do not really see snippets and layouts as content, but they > certainly could be and you could even give them a URL.
Snippets, layouts, and things like radiant tags are not true web elements. Instead they are abstract concepts that correspond to how users go about building sites. Concepts like these should guide the user to work more effectively. Frankly, it's one of the things I like most about Radiant. We need to be able to reference them somehow to build pages but I like the delineation to the user that "these are pages" and "these are only parts of pages." Once you get outside developers, you can easily get into too much abstraction. While I favor Radiant owning all content and, possibly, abstracting it (I'm from that same old OO school), I agree wholeheartedly that users fundamentally approach the different content types differently. For instance the benefit of page parts is lost on me if the content type is an image. Of course an edit image page... hmmm that might be cool. -Chris -- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/. _______________________________________________ Radiant mailing list Post: [email protected] Search: http://radiantcms.org/mailing-list/search/ Site: http://lists.radiantcms.org/mailman/listinfo/radiant
