----- Original Message -----
From: "Raymond Camden" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Spectra-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, 10 April, 2001 12:50 AM
Subject: RE: containers versus custom tags
> > Consider the following disadvantags of containers:
> > * if an object gets removed in the webtop that was assigned to the
> > container, it is not automatically removed from the container and
> > can create
> > errors in page execution.
>
> This is not really a bug, imho. If you delete a record in any web app, and
> that record is being used somewhere, you will get an error. If you delete
an
> object from the webtop, or anywhere for that matter, you should check to
see
> if it has been published. This is not that difficult. Plus, remember that
> it's the rule barfing on the deleted object, not the container itself. So,
> this is probably more an issue with the Basic Schedule rule then
containers
> themselves.
>
I don't think of this a bug so much as a lack of a feature. I do wish there
was a simple way to maintain the integrity of the site. It seems to me
containers create the potential for this to be an advantage but one has to
code your own removal facility. Why not have Spectra tags to maintain and
check the site integrity in 2.0?
> > * containers are slow to execute. Having more than a couple of them on
the
> > page can slow page processing down considerably.
>
> Well, adding custom tags to your page will add execution time as well. Any
> code will. I have not noticed bad slowdowns caused by containers. I also
use
> caching a lot as well - but I use that for Spectra and non Spectra sites.
>
> > * when you allow users to create pages with unique containerids, large
> > amounts of pages will bring/slow your server down, because the SLM is
> > preloaded in server-memory. It will also render your snazzy SLM tree
> > incredibly slow.
>
> Ok, but how is this a Spectra problem? This is an issue w/ any web app
that
> allows users to make low level changes (I consider adding new pages to be
> 'low level'). If you allow your users to do this - things are going to get
> messy - wether you use Spectra or not. The SLM, large or not, should not
be
> affecting your performance though. Can you give me an estimate on how
large
> (# of pages, containers) your site is?
>
How about an optional drill down SLM for 1000s of pages in 2.0?
>
> > * container rules have edit handlers that allow multiple settings
> > per rule.
> > However, every setting that is different from the same rule in another
> > container requires a unique containerid, costing performance.
>
> That's not exactly true - or I may be misreading you. Every container that
> is unique will have a unique ID. You can only reuse containers by passing
in
> the same ID. Therefore, every container will also have unique rules as
well.
> Therefore, when you embed the rule into the container, yo uare making
unique
> rule objects, not container objects. (Ok, I'm being anal. ;) Again, I
don't
> see this as that big of a deal.
>
Again it would be nice to have more Spectra tags to manipulate containers.
For example creating a handler to publish [or to remove] an object to [or
from] three different containers takes some time to code. A couple of
Spectra tags would make this a breeze.
> > * containers mix database content (a container record, rule record) with
> > programmatic functionality (show me all the press releases)
> > * ...
>
> Why is that bad? Isn't that the point of publishing? To me, every CMS
> (content management system) has an idea of "In this area, apply this
> publishing rule, where the rule fetches certain content objects." I mean -
> that's the point of a CMS, right? To get and display content according to
> certain rules. (I'm probably misreading your complaint here. Can you
> rephrase?)
>
I also don't see what is wrong with this. Do you mean that the re-use of
rules is an issue? I do think it could be easier to create rules that govern
multiple containers on multiple pages.
> [deletia]
> > It seems to me that the idea of containers is related to the concept of
> > isolating back end users from the techies. If a system is well
> > prepared, you
> > can do a lot with containers, switching publishing rules,
> > allowing metadata
> > keyword selection, etc.
> > However, I found in practice that users don't want to have this
> > flexibility.
> > They want to be able to add a press release and know that it
> > appears on page
> > so and so. Basically, an object centered and wizard based
> > approach. Most of
>
> Ok, but now it sounds like your complaining about the interface. Remember
> that the container editor is _not_ something you have to use. At my last
> Spectra job (and my current job), I'm not using the container editor. At
the
> earlier job, the client said it was too complex. So, no big deal, I just
> wrote my own interface to the containers. At my current project, I'm the
> admin, and I just wanted something short and sweet.
>
> > done under the hood, why not use custom tags?
>
> And I do! :) But your acting like it's a "one or the other" type thing,
and
> it's not. I use custom tags to interface with the containers. Well, the
> default container editors do the same thing! It's just a matter of choice,
> really. If you don't like the editors that come out of the box, you can
> easily design your own.
>
I agree with this and often create my own functionality to appear in
designmode. Admins often prefer this to teaching others to use the WebTop.
May be what would help is to have a kit of interface components that
developers could plug together to make their own designmode features. Such a
kit would have higher level parts than the current UI tags. Like a set of
example components that can be put together in different combinations and
then tailored.
>
>
> =======================================================================
> Raymond Camden, Principal Spectra Compliance Engineer for Macromedia
>
> Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> ICQ UIN : 3679482
>
> "My ally is the Force, and a powerful ally it is." - Yoda
>
>
>
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at
http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To Unsubscribe visit
http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists&body=lists/spectra_talk or send a
message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with 'unsubscribe' in the body.
