Am 29.09.2010, 19:04 Uhr, schrieb Tres Seaver <tsea...@palladion.com>:
>> I've added a for site syndication settings which I propose to use to
>> replace the existing properties tab of the Syndication Tool. Is it okay
>> do this and register action for the view directly on the default profile
>> and not just for the views_support extension? That would be my
> You need to supply more context here: I'm not sure what you are asking.
I've added (but not committed) an action to the globals category which is
tied to this view, ie. the URL expression is
There is no equivalent PythonScript + Template combination for this I
don't propose on writing one. Thus, far all browser views have been
implementations of existing (TTW) code.
>> Looking at the implementation of the Syndication Tool it looks like the
>> Syndication Infos should probably be adapters for IContentish with
>> relevant methods on the Syndication Tool can use but which should get
>> deprecation notices. Thoughts?
> They aren't adapters in the classic sense: they are intended to support
> per-location policy chhanges, not per-type policies. It is pretty weird
> that they don't expose any declared schema, but their job is to sit
> inside a folder and govern the syndication settings for it and any
> subobjects (recursively) which don't have their own info.
Thanks for the clarification but that doesn't make them candidates for
adapters of IFolderish? I just found it confusing that editProperties acts
on the Syndication Tool but enableSyndication acts on object. But maybe
it's more important to provide the missing functionality such as the
policies and reports.
Clark Consulting & Research
Zope-CMF maillist - Zope-CMF@zope.org
See https://bugs.launchpad.net/zope-cmf/ for bug reports and feature requests