Re: Schema provider/CA lookup status

Rob Miller-6 wrote:
> 
> i'm all for concentrating on z3 schemas.  they're still a ways away from
> being a viable substitute, though.  there are a lot of AT fields and
> widgets out there, and a very few z3 fields and widgets that provide
> comparable functionality.
> 
> while i'm stoked that we get to improve things considerably in this
> transition (b/c the z3 approach is better in many ways, and b/c we can
> AJAX-ify our schema interfaces in the process), i think we need to
> realistically assess how far away that is, and adequately support the
> existing paradigms until we've got a viable replacement.
> 
> note that i'm not making a statement about which way this should go, just
> that we need to have a discussion about it.  i'm not convinced either way,
> myself.
> 
>> The functionality you describe here (schema composition through
>> components) is probably something that you'd need to add in Z3-land as
>> well.  And Martin says he needs it today, so maybe it should go in. The
>> only thing I'm afraid of is that we end up with too many ways of doing
>> things (think AT/CA vs. formlib/Z3 schema).  I'd like to hear your
>> opinions.
> 
> i think that the changes should happen.  even if the Z3 schema story was
> ready today (which it isn't), we're still going to have to interoperate w/
> AT-schema based objects for a while.  i think we need to develop methods
> that allow the two to live together, to ease the transition.  i want to be
> able to extend an existing AT object by adding a Z3 field, but w/o having
> to (necessarily) rewrite the existing schema as well.
> 

Amen, brother :)

The bigger point for me is that CMF doesn't yet have a good story for how it
talks to Zope 3 schema based content types. For example, how does it appear
in the 'add' menu (and you can't juse the add menu in Z3 directly, either,
because that's Zope-instance global, not site-local as most things in CMF,
meaning you couldn't have it installed on one CMF site and uninstalled on
another)? How do such objects get properly cataloged? How do they interact
with workflow?

It may not be terribly hard, but we won't get the "full" zope 3 story until
those kinds of things are adressed. For example, the plone_schemas examples
I've seen still derive from DynamicType (I think) and construct a full FTI
in a dict (of course, GS makes that easier now). 

On the other hand, the use case of listen is perfect for when Z3 schemas
make sense right now - lightweight objects, not full CMF-ish content
objects, that are managed with a specific UI rather than the generic CMF
actions-and-menus system.

At least that's my perception of the state of thing right now - and I hope
we can nudge them in the right direction. People like Rocky, Alec, Whit and
Rob are doing great work on pushing the envelope here, and I hope we can
start to document and push the word out a bit more as these examples mature
(the zope.formlib tutorial, for example, is great).

Martin
-- 
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Schema-provider-CA-lookup-status-tf1921614.html#a5304647
Sent from the Archetypes - devel forum at Nabble.com.



-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security?
Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier
Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo
http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=120709&bid=263057&dat=121642