On Friday 12 August 2005 04:20, Dominik Huber wrote: > Your question points out the general problematic the implementation > decision between classification and composition. Zope 3 has the power to > reduce an object to its *pure* identity and implement all further > functionality by adapters and annotated objects (see > zope.app.annotation). This possibility allows you to build objects > heavily throu composition. In extreme case the classification aspect is > *only* used to determine the adapter lookups and other registration > aspects. > > Therefore it will be usefull to use interfaces to build the above > classification, but - and that's very important - that does not mean > that you transfer this classification directly to your deeper > implementation (classes), but you could use *pure* marker interfaces for > that classification purpose too. Those pure marker interfaces could mark > instances of a generic object implementation .
Right, I know you follow this approach with Tiks and it is probably a good approach for CMSs, where everything depends on the behavior in the system, but for regular applications its bogus. I really expect my core objects to have a core functionality. 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