Re: The components of Archetypes

> So, I think 1 and 2 aren't that far apart sometimes.

I agree with this...and I think biggest wins are somewhere in between.

I don't necessarily want a compatibility layer, I just want the 
declarative quality of AT to spit out something I could play with more 
sensibly using the z3 paradigm. And I want people to be able to get a 
feel for the power of the z3 way of doing things in small bitesize pieces.

Once you can do this, tutorials and documentation make sense, because 
the investment require before getting a payoff is low.

> Additionally, I think sometimes doing some of 1 can be beneficial to 2. 
> In particular, it may be worthwhile to start supporting Z3 widgets in 
> Archetypes (I read somewhere that plone_schema makes this possible 
> already? Cool!). In that case, it may make sense to adapt Archetypes to 
> support them, in turn stimulating people to port their widgets, or write 
> new widgets that way at least. That way, they get immediate 
> functionality while doing the right thing for future development, and Z3 
> gets lots of cool new widgets.

+100

There is alot of good stuff in AT, albeit not perfect and sometimes 
obscured by many man years of expedient cruft.  Let's not throw the baby 
out with bath water just because it's been crying too much.  This is an 
excellent opportunity to take what has work about AT and move it forward 
and deprecate what is not used or forgotten.

-w



-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Do you grep through log files
for problems?  Stop!  Download the new AJAX search engine that makes
searching your log files as easy as surfing the  web.  DOWNLOAD SPLUNK!
http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7637&alloc_id=16865&op=click