-
pbugni(e)k dio: > Author: pbugni > Date: Sat Mar 31 00:13:35 2007 > New Revision: 40022 > > Added: > Vice/trunk/plone/syndication/tests/feed_entry.txt > Modified: > Vice/trunk/plone/syndication/adapters.py > Vice/trunk/plone/syndication/configure.zcml > Vice/trunk/plone/syndication/interfaces.py > Vice/trunk/plone/syndication/tests/enclosure.txt > Vice/trunk/plone/syndication/tests/feed.txt > Vice/trunk/plone/syndication/tests/feeditem.txt > Vice/trunk/plone/syndication/tests/folderfeed.txt > Log: > Updated the interfaces to be more pythonic, removing the get and set > accessors. Now using schema fields and @property decorators. > > Improved the tests to pass - we're still missing several, and more get/set > methods in adapters.py are yet to be ported. > Hi guys: I know I've done nothing on Vice since the BBQ-Sprint finished, but I've been keeping and eye on collective-checkins mailing list, and seen these changeset, and I liked to discuss some things. All this stuff of using schema fields instead of some getXXXX methods, is just to delete those methods? If those names are not correct or pythonic, we could just rename them to def description(self)... I thought that the schema fields were used when you want to store things in ZODB and create the add and edit forms in an automated way using formlib, etc. And if I understood correctly we are not persisting IFeed implementers, so we don't need schema fields do we? Mikel -- Mikel Larreategi mlarreategi@... CodeSyntax Azitaingo Industrialdea 3 K E-20600 Eibar Tel: (+34) 943 82 17 80
- Thread Outline:
-
Hi Mikel, On Mon, 2 Apr 2007, Mikel Larreategi wrote: > All this stuff of using schema fields instead of some getXXXX methods, > is just to delete those methods? If those names are not correct or > pythonic, we could just rename them to def description(self)... Yes, renaming would potentially be a good start, but I'd also like to leverage the validation and formlibs, etc. (I realize those tests are yet to be written). > I thought that the schema fields were used when you want to store things > in ZODB and create the add and edit forms in an automated way using > formlib, etc. And if I understood correctly we are not persisting IFeed > implementers, so we don't need schema fields do we? To be honest, I don't yet know, but this feels like the right step. Check out Philipp's slides from 12-metadata.pdf, page 21 for example. You'll note 'average' and 'numberOfRatings' are schema fields. These both become annotations of a recipe, and are persisted as such (I think). I expect we will want to use formlib to simplify the process of syndicating a container. I agree with you that the feed itself is not persisted as an object in the ZODB, but expect that all the data we need to gather does need to be persisted, specifically as annotations on the container. Please point out my error in reasoning if I'm on the wrong path. Thanks, Paul