Rocky Burt wrote:
>   1) Ease of development - AT helps cut down on boilerplate code
>      as compared to building a regular CMF type (without AT)
>   2) Schema - The ability to declare which fields a content type has
>      and what "types" those fields are
>   3) Widgets - The ability to declare general purpose distributable
>      widgets that get displayed by default for either viewing a field
>      directly or viewed the editable version of a field
>   4) References - Being able to have a common framework that allows us
>      to relate one AT-based content type instance to another

I forgot a very important fifth component:
  5) Storage layers - AT provides a standard way of having the storage
of fields exist somewhere other than directly on the content type itself
such as in a sql database.

My opinion on #5 is:
  I think sqlos has a good approach to accomplishing another storage
layer on standard z3 content types.  At a minimum the AT storage layer
mechanism should be broken out... possibly using the same sort of
strategy as sqlos (although I think I'd still like to see something a
little more transparent that does all field<->implementation mappings
externally in zcml or something similiar)

- Rocky

Rocky Burt
ServerZen Software --
ServerZen Hosting --
News About The Server --

Zope-CMF maillist  -

See for bug reports and feature requests

Reply via email to