On Apr 12, 2005 2:03 AM, Dries Buytaert <dries@buytaert.net> wrote:
1. From what I have seen, a taxonomy-based permission scheme is more popular than one using node types. If you aim to get this module included in core, it is worth discussing the idea of using the combination of roles and taxonomy terms, rather than the combination of roles and node types. We should aim to include the most popular scheme in core.
taxonomy_access has been the only module where it is effective to control access to large sections of content -- this does not mean it is best/popular, it just means that it was the one that solved problems for people the easiest. It means that you MUST apply taxonomy to items to control permission -- for building static sites where you would use book outlines to organize content, this doesn't work at all. I think that I would rather see a taxonomy-focused and a roles-focused access, and have them duke it out during live 4.6 development. I'm not convinced that one module could do both well. But feel free to prove me wrong by coding up a really killer implementation :P And of course, I've been loving the groups module, which handles access to content really nicely, but whose goal isn't really permissions around individual nodes.
2. Using a tab is OK for now, but ideally this would be part of the new node submission form.
Agreed, this should be able to be done at node edit time. I understand where chx is going with the tab-based approached, and I really like it for a certain style of community site. You might even have a tab that says "request access" -- e.g. if you want to help edit a page. -- Boris Mann http://www.bryght.com