[development] One-to-one tables considered harmful
bashratthesneaky at gmail.com
Mon Jun 4 15:34:19 UTC 2007
Also, if comments are nodes, then you can modify them through CCK.
Many new things would be possible that currently are not (or not as
easily) - or am I seeing that wrong?
But then the need to have per-content type "comment content types"
could become a requirement, simply because you need different CCK
fields per content type.
So this brings me to: why don't we allow for any content type to be
chosen as the "comment content type"?
Of course this is completely off-topic, sorry for that.
On Jun 4, 2007, at 16:50 , Robert Douglass wrote:
> Earnie Boyd wrote:
>> I have been reading the posts and wondering what is so different
>> about a comment. A comment is nothing more than content very much
>> similar to a node. As content it has a specialized content type
>> which at the moment isn't visible to the administrator. So, I
>> think to myself that perhaps a comment should be treated as a node
>> and the comment table is nothing more than a one to many
>> relationship mapper. I'll give this some more thought toward D-7
>> I can see this idea as enhancing many modules.
> Please to check out the nodecomment module which does just what you
> describe: http://drupal.org/project/nodecomment
More information about the development