On 9/23/07, Roger Ineichen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > "Such built in views" means what? "Optional" how? And why?
> I mean with built in views just views which comes within a
> package. Such view component are located in the browser folder
> and built on the BrowserPage classes. I guess the term views
> is common for that and should be well known.

You misunderstand. I did not ask for an explanation of wat "views"
meant. I asked for what you mean with "such built in views". It seem
sthat you mean the views that make up the ZMI.

> Yes, this is what we like to do. We like to write 3rd party
> packages. But the problem is, this views are using templates which
> we don't support, e.g. use-macro, fill-slot etc.

Aha, the views that exists uses a master template macro that you don't have.

> Also the
> configure.zcml file registers menu items for zmi_views and
> zmi_action which is does not exist in our setup.
> I guess it should be possible to use Zope3 without the need
> of zmi_views and zmi_action menu items Whih is not the case
> right now. See all the ftesting.zcml files in the different
> egg packages.
> Pobabbly the proposal should be simpler and propose.
> "Get rid of zmi_views, zmi_actions, StandardMacros and
> hardcoded template relations in views"

Yes. What you want to do is to get rid of the requirement to support
ZMI in your design. To be quite honest, I think the best way to do
that, is to not use the main_template from the pages you do, but use
another main template for your own pages, and just leave the ZMI be
where it is.

There might be some other solution too, but this one has the benefit
of the MI views still being available if you should need them.

Lennart Regebro: Zope and Plone consulting.
+33 661 58 14 64
Zope3-dev mailing list
Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Reply via email to