Previously Jens Vagelpohl wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> 
> On Sep 23, 2008, at 19:19 , Wichert Akkerman wrote:
> 
> > Previously Jens Vagelpohl wrote:
> >> On Sep 23, 2008, at 17:01 , Wichert Akkerman wrote:
> >>
> >>> Are there any objections to making the CMFCore interfaces derived
> >>> classes from zope.dublincore, or possibly even using those directly
> >>> where possible?
> >>
> >> Do you see any specific benefit, more than just "replace our code  
> >> with
> >> other code to shift the maintenance burden"?
> >
> > I found myself writing some code which needs to get dublin core data  
> > from
> > content and should work for both zope3 and zope2 applications, except
> > for the difference in interfaces.
> 
> As you already found, the ICMFDublinCore should be supported by both,  
> right?

Except for the fact that no CMF (or AT) content type uses the
zope.dublincore variant? ICMFDublinCore is also much more than I'm
interested in - IDCTimes is all I need.

Wichert.

-- 
Wichert Akkerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>    It is simple to make things.
http://www.wiggy.net/                   It is hard to make things simple.
_______________________________________________
Zope-CMF maillist  -  Zope-CMF@lists.zope.org
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-cmf

See https://bugs.launchpad.net/zope-cmf/ for bug reports and feature requests

Reply via email to