ofbiz-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Al Byers <bye...@automationgroups.com>
Subject Re: Content documentation ...
Date Tue, 04 Jul 2006 16:15:58 GMT

I am the one who probably wrote the documentation of which you speak and 
no apologies are needed. It is great that someone is taking an interest 
in content management. I had to drop it a while back. I am using it 
slightly now, though I am not working with OFBiz full-time at the 
moment. I will do whatever I can to help move things along.

I think the sample project idea is good. Perhaps we can pick something 
that will build on and exercise Hans's blog upgrade. I wrote a lot of 
code to produce the documentation site that was used by Undersun 
Consulting. It is similar to the code that is contained in the community 
specialized app, which is really just a blogging site. Anyway, I think a 
documentation site would be very useful. I would contribute whatever 
code I have.

I like the wiki idea too. At my current job, someone introduced a wiki 
and said they chose it because it was one of the only J2EE-based wikis 
out there. That got me to thinking that it would be nice to have a wiki 
feature in OFBiz. In fact, that would probably be a much better 
documentation site, than what I did before.

One issue that I see needing resolving at this time is the "direction" 
of the ContentAssoc entity. It has a from  field (contentId) and a "to" 
field (contentIdTo). In any content managed site, there is the concept 
of relating dynamic pieces of content to fixed pieces. This is like a 
newspaper where the editorials are always at the same place, but the 
content changes. This association is done via the ContentAssoc entity, 
which is dated. The problem is that I think I wrongly introduced the 
idea that the fixed content would be the "to" component and the dynamic 
piece would be the "from".  The contentAssocTypeId for this link is 
"PUBLISH_LINK". If I had know, then I think I would have drawn from the 
PartyRelationship example, in which the from and to partyIds and roles 
are designated based on the direction of the partyRelationshipName (and 
partyRelationshipTypeId, which is like the contentAssocTypeId field, 
follows the name).
This is taken from the party/data/PartyTypeData.xml file:
    <!-- NOTE: The partyRelationshipName describes the TO party, ie A is 
a customer of B, so A is the partyTo and B is the partyFrom -->

So maybe I just contradicted myself, and what is there is correct. 
PUBLISH_LINK (the contentAssocTypeId) is sort of the "name" of the 
ContentAssoc and that sort of names the "fixed" content, which  by the 
statement above, should be the contentIdTo. In any event, this is 
something that should be in the documentation.

I know a good bit about the content and I will try to do what I can to 
answer any questions and try to take some of the load off of David.


Ian Gilbert wrote:
> Hi All,
> I am in the process of updating my documentation which was last released a few months
ago.  In the
> process of doing this it has become apparent that the current article on content management
> misleading and incorrect (apologies to anyone who has spent time on this).  I will either
> this or delete it from the document.  I would much prefer to do the former.  With this
in mind I
> am looking at the current docs on the cms to see if I can make any progress on my own.
 I did this
> a while ago and was unsucessful and am writing to enquire if anyone in the know can give
me some
> help with this or if there are other considerations that I should take into account (say
if the
> whole project was in the process of being rewritten).
> I was thinking that I'd take a sample project (say creating a wiki or news site) and
document that
> from and end user perspective.  I will be happy to give a co-author credit to anyone
who can help
> me with this.  There are a number of ways this might happen but I have had a lot of luck
with vnc
> and direct email in the past :)
> I am looking to flesh out other aspects of this document as well.  Currently it is geared
up for
> drop shipping but the company who currently provides our warehousing services may well
become our
> next client and so I will be looking to flesh out the stuff about inventory and asset
> I hope to touch on other applications in due course as well.
> Thanks and very best wishes
> Ian Gilbert

View raw message