[development] Even more flexibility in content management

[Chris Kennedy]

Agreed that collapsible fieldsets and css-hovering might be helpful. If
I remember correctly there is an issue to add the role name to the
checkbox title as well, and jQuery could be added in various ways too.

It should also be noted that in 5.x one can go to admin/user/roles and
edit permissions on a per-role basis. Although now that I look at it the
"edit permissions" link isn't shown for anonymous and authenticated
roles, which seems to be a bug.

Another implication is that it might be helpful to edit permissions on a
per-module basis (i.e. across all roles). Maybe we could add links to
this in the status message when enabling a module (or modules).

.ck

Khalid B wrote:
> On 12/28/06, *Greg Knaddison - GVS* <Greg at growingventuresolutions.com
> <mailto:Greg at growingventuresolutions.com>> wrote:
> 
>     On 12/28/06, Rob Barreca <rob at electronicinsight.com
>     <mailto:rob at electronicinsight.com>> wrote:
>     >  A bit off-topic and not super critical, but this will also need
>     to spur a
>     > discussion of a more manageable access control page if we have
>     something
>     > like 5 perms for each content type. Is there an issue/any ideas on
>     how to
>     > simplify the access control page? Or, is a super long matrix
>     format still
>     > the best way to go?
> 
>     Until someone comes up with a brilliant replacement UI, I think
>     that's it.
> 
>     Are there any similar models from other systems that we could copy?  I
>     don't know of any good ones off the top of my head.
> 
> 
> There is also the issue of when you have more than 5 or so roles, and
> the list
> goes to the right beyond the screen.
> 
> Some alternatives were proposed some time back.
> 
> One of them (was it by Konstantin K?) was to use css to highlight the
> column titles
> (role names) on the line that has the cursor on it.
> 
> Another was to have collapsible.
> 
> It is a tough usability one to tackle, specially scaling well for many
> roles and
> many modules and many permissions per module.
>