<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
Hi,<br>
<br>
syscrusher: I was simply giving an example - as I said more thorough
usability testing will give these answers. If "content" is the way to
go then that's great. <br>
<br>
victor: As for having default content types I think there are two
levels - Drupal as a system/framework should not assume anything but a
fresh installation should give a user(especially a new one that is
probably just exploring the system) some types to work with, even if it
is just a way to illustrate that different types that are possible. If
the first thing a new user has to do is actually create a content type
then we lost them right there...<br>
<br>
Best,<br>
<br>
Ronald<br>
<br>
Victor Kane wrote:
<blockquote
cite="mid:ff176450902110521p6a76d241g6e8720508e993efe@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">If there are any improvements at all to be gained here, it
is that there should be NO default Drupal content types, except maybe
by way of example.<br>
<br>
Therefore, _nothing_ should be assumed about sub-class terms, they will
be up to the end user in each case.<br>
<br>
So rather than argue in favor or against "post" as opposed to whatever,
something like "content" (i.e. generic) is what should go.<br>
<br>
Victor Kane<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://awebfactory.com.ar">http://awebfactory.com.ar</a><br>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 11:17 AM, Syscrusher
<span dir="ltr"><<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:syscrusher@4th.com">syscrusher@4th.com</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote"
style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<div class="Ih2E3d">On Wed, 2009-02-11 at 06:41 +0100, Ronald Ashri
wrote:<br>
> For example a page could be a Title and Content, but a story would
be<br>
> Title, Post (a more blog-like name),<br>
<br>
<br>
</div>
I respectfully disagree. "Content" is a nice generic term, and I think<br>
that the same field should be called the same thing across all the<br>
standard Drupal-default node types. Also, many Drupal sites are not<br>
blogs nor blog-like sites, so we should not assume that blog-ish<br>
terminology will be familiar to all Drupal content creators.<br>
<br>
Kind regards,<br>
<br>
Scott<br>
<font color="#888888">--<br>
Syscrusher <<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:syscrusher@4th.com">syscrusher@4th.com</a>><br>
<br>
</font></blockquote>
</div>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>