[development] Even more flexibility in content management

[Jeremy Epstein]

Hi Zohar,

If you need need permissions that are more fine-grained than the ones
available on the 'administer access control' page, your best bet would
be to explore the node access system. Modules can implement the node
access system in various ways, e.g. restrict access according to nodes
according to taxonomy classification (taxonomy_access), or according
to user groups (og).

I'm not sure if there's a node access module in contrib to restrict
access according to node type, but if there isn't, it shouldn't be too
hard to develop. This would probably be the best approach to
implementing more fine-grained access according to node type.

Cheers,
Jaza.

On 12/29/06, Zohar Stolar <z.stolar at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> (might arrive twice... excuse me if it does)
>
>  I was looking through Drupal.org to find if there is work towards
> granulating the permissions table a bit more, by adding a way to limit
> administer/access to nodes by type.
>  The idea (which has certainly been raised before) is to add, next to:
>
>  "create TYPE content", - adding new nodes of that content type
>  "edit own TYPE content", - editing the contents of own nodes of that
> content type
>  "edit TYPE content", - editing the contents of all nodes of that content
> type (whether or not the user has right to create nodes)
>
>  two more possibilities:
>
>  "view TYPE content" - roles that are allowed to view the content type's
> nodes
>  "administer TYPE content" - roles that are allowed to modify the publishing
> options on all nodes of that content type
>
>  I encounter more and more situations where I want to delegate the
> publishing options permission to a specific role, but only to one content
> type, otherwise I have to give the person control over the whole site's
> content.
>
>  Such a change should be done through core, so actually my questions are:
>  Is there any work on this direction / open issue?
>  Are there already any conclusions?
>  Should I start writing a patch :-) ?
>
>  Cheers,
>  Zohar