Charlie Clark wrote:
Am 28.05.2008 um 13:02 schrieb Philipp von Weitershausen:
Views don't "use" layers. You apply a skin layer to the request, and
depending on whether the view was registered for this skin layer or
any of the layers that are contained in that skin layer, the view will
Thanks, that's the explanation I was missing - I hope I'm not the only
one who doesn't quite understand what is adapting what when a view is
Um, this is explained in detail in my book. Views are always looked up
getMultiAdapter( (context, request), name="foo.html" )
(whitespace added for clarification.)
So by applying marker interfaces to the request, we can change the
output of that adaption. See pages 168-169 in my book.
Is it possible to get individual views to use different skins without
using ++skin++ in the URL?
That doesn't make any sense to me and it's not how the CMF works
either. In the CMF you may put different views in different skin
layers (i.e. folders), but then you always combine them to a skin (in
"Properties" page of the portal_skins tool where you enter a list of
folders that make up the skin). For instance, you may have the
following skin definition there:
Default = custom
This is very similar to Zope 3, except that we now have interfaces,
e.g. ICMFDefaultSkin, ISomethingElse and IMyCustomLayer. You'd now
register views for those layer interfaces (probably just for
IMyCustomLayer) and then combine those layer interfaces in a skin
interface, which is then given a name using the <interface />
directive and then registered as the default skin:
class IMySkin(ICustom, ISomethingElse, ICMFDefaultSkin):
<browser:defaultSkin name="MySkin" />
Okay, this is starting to make sense. Layers and skins are confusing
especially as they are all just interfaces!
That's what's so easy about them!
:-O When does the skin name get used apart from in ++skin++ urls?
Wherever you'd like to use it. Perhaps you'd like to show a list of
available skins to the user so that s/he can choose one.
Views are still registered to layers, ie. interfaces, aren't they?
What I had been expecting to work, but which I think I now understand
why it wouldn't, was the ability to add a layer for something like an
"administration" layer which would call a version of standard_macros
specific to that layer. I was hoping to be able to change this simply in
ZCML rather than in the templates, ie. configure the views I want to use
a different "skin". Instead, it seems, I need to write and register my
own macros and change those templates that need to use them. Not sure
whether this is entirely the right way to go about this, as opposed to
using a viewlet to do it but as least I've got it to work.
I'm not quite sure I'm following you here. Often skins mostly contain
custom macros, meaning all views are registered for some default layer
(e.g. IDefaultBrowserLayer) and they look up macros using
context/@@standard_macros. Then it's up to the specific skin to provide
a standard_macros view. This is the one that defines the look and feel
of the site and therefore changes from skin to skin.
This is exactly what my book explains and does (see Exapmles 10.3.2 and
30.3.3)! Forgive my bluntness, but it's hard to believe at this point
you've read it...
You're welcome. For the fourth edition, and I hope there will be one, it
might be an idea to add a couple of paragraphs from above to clarify
customisation by adding a layer, ie. where world_cookery inherits from
Rotterdam and where it differs.
The IWorldcookerySkin interface doesn't inherit from Rotterdam. And to
be honest, I wouldn't know what else to write. I even have a "Flashback"
box that compares Zope 3 style layers to CMF layers and skins on page
173. And what I've written in the two previous emails were mostly
rephrased passages from my book anyway.
Zope-CMF maillist - Zope-CMF@lists.zope.org
See http://collector.zope.org/CMF for bug reports and feature requests