Hi!
Martin Aspeli wrote: > yuppie wrote: >> Martin Aspeli wrote: >>> Wichert Akkerman wrote: >>>> Why not a ++add++ traverser? Aren't traversed supposed to be used for >>>> that kind of thing? Or does a view gives us something here that a >>>> traverser doesn't? >>> Namespace traversal adapters are similar to IPublishTraverse solutions. >>> The difference is that the namespace traversal adapter normally returns >>> something "containerish" from which traversal continues. I think it's >>> intended mostly as a "redirect" to a different traversal namespace, e.g. >>> in the way that plone.app.portlets has namespaces for portlet managers. >> I don't think a containerish return value is characteristic for >> namespace adapters. For example the ++view++ traverser usually doesn't >> return something containerish. >> >> I now implemented an ++add++ traverser in my sandbox and it seems to >> work fine. > > Cool. :) Let us know when it's checked in, I'd love to have a look at it! Ok. I checked in all my local changes. AFAICS everything works fine, but tests are still missing. Please note that so far only File has a full add view. All other content types use the fallback add view. I still use the pattern that adapts ITypeInformation as well. Our add views are anyway Zope 2 specific, so I don't think requiring explicit Zope 2 security declarations is unacceptable. All other solutions have also their drawbacks. Cheers, Yuppie _______________________________________________ Zope-CMF maillist - Zope-CMF@lists.zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-cmf See https://bugs.launchpad.net/zope-cmf/ for bug reports and feature requests