[Radiant] Radiant replace Pages with Abstract Content Model

[Oliver Baltzer]

John W. Long wrote:
> Chris Parrish wrote:
>> What you are running up against is the fact that the core of radiant 
>> does not model the true problem domain.  And I continually read here 
>> were developers hit this wall.
>>
>> ...
>>
>> The (wise) simplification of UI has lead to a over-simplification of the 
>> data model - to the point where the model doesn't match enough of web 
>> reality.

This is exactly what I am trying to address. The data model does not
have to reflect the simplicity of the UI, as long as it does not
affect the UI. Especially not, when it could make the software
developer's job easier.

> I'm not sure that I agree. My concern with Oliver's patch (which has 
> been suggested at least once before) is that it over complicates the 
> model. I'm a little leary of creating a complex inheritance heirarchy
> for Radiant. 

I, as a software developer, personally find dealing with many
different non-related classes more complicated than with an
inheritance hierarchy that provides abstraction. Very much like I
prefer using a uniform set of file manipulation tools to move, copy,
rename, archive, find, categorize, etc. files on my file system,
independent of what content they represent.

> Yes pages and images and redirects have URLs, but beyond 
> that they have very little in common. 

While I would not throw redirects together with pages and images, as
they do not really represent content, I think pages and images and
other content types have a lot in common. They can be published,
searched, tagged (as in labeled), commented, viewed, have authors and
licenses. If I think harder I might come up with some more.

Cheers,
Oliver

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 191 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.radiantcms.org/pipermail/radiant/attachments/20070330/400b4e25/signature.bin