Re: FacilityContent

[Ean Schuessler <ea...@brainfood.com>]

Bilgin Ibryam wrote:
> I need to upload and assign documents to facilities. These includes
> maps of the facility, documents related to the facility etc.
> To achieve this, I'm planning to create FacilityContent and
> FacilityContentType entities which will be similar to existing
> entities used to assign content to other entities (PartyContent,
> OrderContent). Also I will provide a screen in facility application
> where the user can upload and see content related to the selected
> facility.
>
> Are there any objections or ideas to incorporate into this proposal?
Seems like a worthwhile addition. I've always been a little bit bothered
by the seeming redundancy of the xxxx_content_type fields but that is
the established pattern. I can see exactly why you want the feature. I'd
say go for it!

-- 
Ean Schuessler, CTO
ean@brainfood.com
214-720-0700 x 315
Brainfood, Inc.
http://www.brainfood.com

Re: FacilityContent

[Bilgin Ibryam <bi...@gmail.com>]

Committed to trunk in r908602

Bilgin

Re: FacilityContent

[Bilgin Ibryam <bi...@gmail.com>]

Ean Schuessler wrote:
> Bilgin Ibryam wrote:
>   
>> I need to upload and assign documents to facilities. These includes
>> maps of the facility, documents related to the facility etc.
>> To achieve this, I'm planning to create FacilityContent and
>> FacilityContentType entities which will be similar to existing
>> entities used to assign content to other entities (PartyContent,
>> OrderContent). Also I will provide a screen in facility application
>> where the user can upload and see content related to the selected
>> facility.
>>
>> Are there any objections or ideas to incorporate into this proposal?
>>     
> Seems like a worthwhile addition. I've always been a little bit bothered
> by the seeming redundancy of the xxxx_content_type fields but that is
> the established pattern. I can see exactly why you want the feature. I'd
> say go for it!
>
>   
Adam, Ean,

In data mode resource book content entities are not described and I 
don't know what was the original idea behind xxxx_content_type entity.
I suppose it is not the type of the content but the type of the 
relation. I decided to include it only to keep the consistency with the 
previous entities. I also don't need it and ContentPurpose seems to be 
enough.
I also see the last addition - CustRequestContent didn't follow this 
pattern - there is not CustRequestContentType. I will add only 
FacilityContent entity.

Thanks for sharing your ideas.
Bilgin