Re: I18N content

Hi!

> At europython I've discussed with longsleep (author of I18NLayer) about
> our respective I18N stuff and I'll try to explain some idea here. 
> My implementation has some problems which are not easy to fix, 
> catalog support and navigator's cache support. Those are correctly
> supported by I18NLayer. So we think that we should implement a field
> based internationalization using the I18NLayer. 

Can you maybe explain this catalog problem a bit more? What's the problem with
it? Maybe it makes sense to know a bit more about that as it might affect other
solutions/ideas floating around in people's heads, too.

> The base idea is to add a 'internationalizable' (or another shorter name:) 
> attribute  to the field which may be set to true or false. Then in the 
> accessor/mutator methods, if this attribute is false and if the object is
> contained by an I18N layer, we would set/get it on the parent layer
> instead of the object itself (otherwise everything would occurs as it is
> currently). 

I wonder if it's possible to implement separate from the Archetypes main branch,
like an additional product but it seems not that it's possible. 

This is actually something we might discuss (or Benjamin has to decide ;-)
if new stuff should be implemented always in the base or (if possible)
more as separate package. If it's not possible it might be a sign that one
should think about interfaces and more about how to change Archetypes to
support this extension. I have this problem right now with ArchView (which
I am going to put in the CVS later today) where I have some problems extending
it without changing Archetypes directly.

So in short: Is it a goal to make Archetypes easier to extend by trying to 
create separate products and enhancing it's interfaces instead of just
merging it directly into the base product.

(maybe this is the wrong discussion reply to this post as this sounds like
a not so big change if it's only adding an attribute).

At least it would make the separate modules easier to understand.

> After that, I'ld like to add some ui stuff to hide the I18NLayer as much
> as possible.
> 
> Opinions ? If no one complains, I'll revert my change and implement it
> as described here.

Have you done your previous changes on a branch? Never looked at it yet,
but maybe it makes sense to do so ;)

cheers,
  Christian

-- 
COM.lounge                                          http://comlounge.net/
communication & design                                 
info-WV3Fc3dYO6sqcZcGjlUOXw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx


-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email sponsored by: Free pre-built ASP.NET sites including
Data Reports, E-commerce, Portals, and Forums are available now.
Download today and enter to win an XBOX or Visual Studio .NET.
http://aspnet.click-url.com/go/psa00100006ave/direct;at.asp_061203_01/01