-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On Sep 14, 2008, at 12:26 , yuppie wrote:
> This mail has been lying around for a while because I'm not sure it's
> the right way to start the discussion. But now I'll give it a try.
> the sprinters find some time to discuss this:
We're down to 2 at this point and I need to take off very soon, so
here's a very quick assessment from Tres and me:
> b) for URLs like http://www.example.org/guestbook/+/Message
> The '+' view already implements IPublishTraverse, so we can't change
> traversal using an adapter. The only solution I can see is to replace
> the '+' view by a customized version.
This looks like a good solution. I believe Zope 3 uses the same or a
> 3.) For which context should we register the add views?
> The add views will depend on special portal type handling done by the
> traverser. So we register the add views for traverser?
> Or should all views have a default portal type that is used if we
> add views directly? In that case we would register the add view for
I'm not sure, hoping for comments from others.
> plone.dexterity uses an @@add-dexterity-content traverser, but I
> don't think product names like dexterity or cmf should be visible in
> URLs. Those are implementation details that should be transparent
> for users.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (Darwin)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Zope-CMF maillist - Zope-CMF@lists.zope.org
See https://bugs.launchpad.net/zope-cmf/ for bug reports and feature requests