Re: [Modus-devs] New Proposal

[Sean A C. <se...@co...>]

On Friday, Nov 15, 2002, at 06:04 US/Pacific, Jeremy Firsenbaum wrote:
> Here's a revamped modus_settings that has two main sections: component=20=

> definitions and contentobject definitions. The components are aliased=20=

> for easy reference and defaults are=A0declared. The=20
> contentObjects=A0reference a contentType - note that this is the same=20=

> pressrelease descriptor=A0for all but one of the objects. Any given=20
> contentType can have multiple contentObjects.

Ah, this clarifies the object/type thing I was concerned about in the=20
previous email.

> I see the components section as being optional. A default component=20
> definition should be part of the modus internals which=A0offers users =
a=20
> set of built-in components to reference in their contentObjects. And=20=

> for another level of simplicity, the=A0defaults make it unnecessary to=20=

> even declare any components.=A0I think this cuts down on the =
complexity=20
> for novices, but leaves the framework highly flexible and extensible.=A0=


I think I agree with this. Good defaults help novices a lot.

> I've also attached an image of the resulting framework. At the top is=20=

> a map of Modus after it has been instantiated, at the bottom is a=20
> process diagram of how=A0one contenttype descriptor=A0is passed to=20
> different contentobjects.

Not sure I really follow the bottom diagram but the top diagram is just=20=

fine (although I still think contentObject will confuse people - it=20
confused me! - since it is really a *type* not an *object*).

Sean A Corfield -- http://www.corfield.org/blog/

"If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive."
-- Margaret Atwood