[development] image node type

Earl Miles merlin at logrus.com
Fri Dec 9 16:30:15 UTC 2005

Sebastian wrote:
  > Frankly I feel all images should be a node. Even if an image is included
> in a content node just for spice or illustration, very likely these 
> images could be thumbnails that link to a larger version. Same story if 
> I include a true photo in a content node, it will most likely also be a 
> thumbnail linking to the full image node.
> So I see no reason to build two frameworks for handling images when one 
> will do. Why the arbitrary separation? They should all be nodes, and if 
> we need organizational separation of "photos-available-in-galleries" vs 
> "spice-and-illustration-images", that should be handled via taxonomy, 
> and only the desired terms made available in menus/galleries.

As an admin, I'm afraid I disagree. For people who write articles on my site, I 
find simplicity to be the absolutely most important issue. They want to be able 
to attach an image to a node and be done with it. If they have to set up an 
image node and then figure out how to link that image node to their article, 
they're going to have a lot fewer articles with images.

More information about the development mailing list