On Thursday 20 February 2003 11:38 am, Jean Jordaan wrote:
> All I can think is that that object 'basic' lacks context for
> some reason (i.e. lacks an acquisition wrapper?). I can't think
> why it lacks context .. we use that idiom all over the app, and
> don't normally get any problems.
You nee
--On Donnerstag, 20. Februar 2003 08:05 +0100 Dieter Maurer
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Zope 2.5.1
A "PathIndex" maps (pathsegment,level) onto the "IISet" of document ids
with "pathsegment" at "level" in their path.
An "IISet" is a single persistent object, written as a whole to
the ZODB. Its
Shane Hathaway wrote:
On 02/20/2003 09:06 PM, Tim Hoffman wrote:
In case your not aware Chandler OSAfoundation is basing their new PIM
on RDF/ZODB/Python etc...
if you haven't already it might be worth having a look at how they see
RDF fitting into the picture.
http://www.osafoundation.org/Ch
On Friday, Feb 21, 2003, at 04:16 Europe/Paris, Craeg K Strong wrote:
Paul Everitt wrote:
On jeudi, fév 20, 2003, at 22:15 Europe/Paris, Shane Hathaway wrote:
- RDF is hard to read, but legibility by humans isn't its primary
focus. It's more concerned with providing a way to declare any
r
Hi Shane
Below is a posting from David McCusker who is working on the backedn of
Chandler.
===
From: Rys (David) McCusker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: repository access protocol Re: [Design] Knowing when you've
read
Tim
Paul Everitt wrote:
On jeudi, fév 20, 2003, at 22:15 Europe/Paris, Shane Hathaway wrote:
- RDF is hard to read, but legibility by humans isn't its primary
focus. It's more concerned with providing a way to declare any
relationship about anything.
Right. That's what the graph tool at the W
On 02/20/2003 09:06 PM, Tim Hoffman wrote:
In case your not aware Chandler OSAfoundation is basing their
new PIM on RDF/ZODB/Python etc...
if you haven't already it might be worth having a look at how they see
RDF fitting into the picture.
http://www.osafoundation.org/Chandler_rel._0.1.htm
Wow
Hi Shane
In case your not aware Chandler OSAfoundation is basing their
new PIM on RDF/ZODB/Python etc...
if you haven't already it might be worth having a look at how they see
RDF fitting into the picture.
http://www.osafoundation.org/Chandler_rel._0.1.htm
See ya
Tim
On Wed, 2003-02-19 at 0
On jeudi, fév 20, 2003, at 22:15 Europe/Paris, Shane Hathaway wrote:
[snip]
With all this in mind, I just studied my Mozilla mimeTypes.rdf file
again. At first, this file looks nasty. I've only defined handlers
for two mime types, application/pdf and application/x-zope-edit, yet
the string
Paul Everitt wrote:
Shane Hathaway wrote:
I've understood the mechanics of RDF for a while, but never understood
what makes it better than what we already have. Now I think I get it:
RDF theory is a new kind of database abstraction. It's similar to a
relational database in that you put piec
On Thu, 2003-02-20 at 13:33, Toby Dickenson wrote:
> On Thursday 20 February 2003 5:17 pm, Jeremy Hylton wrote:
>
> > > There are application-level reasons to mark a transaction as doomed, and
> > > I would like to keep *that* code looking similar ;-). The transaction
> > > states approach would w
Good grief, how did I miss this!!
Shane Hathaway wrote:
I just read the RDF article published here:
http://www.xml.com/pub/a/2003/02/12/rdflib.html
Yes indeed, that is a very good article.
I've understood the mechanics of RDF for a while, but never understood
what makes it better than what
On Thursday 20 February 2003 5:17 pm, Jeremy Hylton wrote:
> > There are application-level reasons to mark a transaction as doomed, and
> > I would like to keep *that* code looking similar ;-). The transaction
> > states approach would work in that context too, right?
>
> Here's a late answer:
>
>
On Wed, 2003-02-12 at 04:23, Toby Dickenson wrote:
> On Tuesday 11 February 2003 5:21 pm, Jeremy Hylton wrote:
> > On Tue, 2003-02-11 at 12:10, Shane Hathaway wrote:
>
> > I'd like to do the transaction states, because it would keep the code in
> > zodb3 and zodb4 similar.
>
> There are applicat
Jean Jordaan wrote:
All I can think is that that object 'basic' lacks context for
some reason (i.e. lacks an acquisition wrapper?). I can't think
why it lacks context .. we use that idiom all over the app, and
don't normally get any problems.
That's all I can think of also. Try examining basic.
Lukasz Racon wrote:
I just read the RDF article published here:
http://www.xml.com/pub/a/2003/02/12/rdflib.html
I've understood the mechanics of RDF for a while, but never understood
what makes it better than what we already have. Now I think I get it:
RDF theory is a new kind of database abstr
> I just read the RDF article published here:
>
> http://www.xml.com/pub/a/2003/02/12/rdflib.html
>
> I've understood the mechanics of RDF for a while, but never understood
> what makes it better than what we already have. Now I think I get it:
> RDF theory is a new kind of database abstraction.
Brian R Brinegar wrote:
Hello,
We are trying to upgrade the ZEO component of our Zope 2.5.1 system from
ZEO 1.0 to ZEO 2.0.2. We are using Python 2.1.3, everything is compiled
from source.
I'm pretty sure ZEO 2 requires Zope 2.6.x...
cheers,
Chris
___
Hi all (and Shane in particular :)
I'm triggering this error:
Unauthorized: The owner of the executing script is defined
outside the context of the object being accessed. Access to
'basic' of (License_PropertySheetsClass instance at e204528)
denied. Access requires Access_contents_inform
19 matches
Mail list logo
