On Saturday 18 June 2005 13:36, Garrett Smith wrote: > > For 3.2, we need to find a way to make this clearer. Either we need > > to provide a more verbose description of what the name is for or > > perhaps, as Stephan has suggested, for components that are always > > looked up without names, we should not provide the option of entering > > a name and, for others, we should require a name. > > IMO, the PAU pattern of not taking a name works well. The confusion > above may be a hold-over from the time when PAU regs did accept names.
Right. In my opinion all nameless utilities are what services used to be. I have not yet seen an exception to this rule. The terminology I introduced for them in the new Tools UI (now called Site Management) is "Unique Utilities", since they are unique to a given site. Regards, Stephan -- Stephan Richter CBU Physics & Chemistry (B.S.) / Tufts Physics (Ph.D. student) Web2k - Web Software Design, Development and Training _______________________________________________ Zope3-users mailing list Zope3email@example.com http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope3-users