Content Manager Question #2

[Adrian Crum <ad...@hlmksw.com>]

I think I've mapped out the basic entity usage for forums. I wanted to see if it's okay to use an 
unused field to hold the forum thread ID. I know I can start with any ContentAssoc record and walk 
up the tree to find the ID of the uppermost message (the thread start) but since forums (and 
threads) can contain thousands of messages this approach is far too inefficient.

Currently the Content.InstanceOfContentId field isn't used in forum messages. It seems like an 
appropriate place to store a thread ID, since the message can be thought of as an instance of a thread.

What do you think?

-Adrian

Re: Content Manager Question #2

[Adrian Crum <ad...@hlmksw.com>]

Thinking about it more...

The service call will have to hit the database for each thread message until the first message in 
the thread is found - which takes me back to the original point I made: it's going to be 
inefficient. It would be better to hit the db once and scoop up all of the messages for that thread.

Any advice would be appreciated. I'd like to get this wrapped up this weekend.

Adrian Crum wrote:

> Let's say you're viewing a screen of recent forum messages, most recent 
> on top. Clicking on a message of interest takes you to a screen where 
> all the messages in that thread are listed - so you can see the message 
> of interest in context.
> 
> If the first screen is generated from a list of Content Generic Values, 
> then the thread ID for each Content needs to be known so that it can be 
> used as a url parameter to get to the "thread view" screen.
> 
> lol - now that I've typed all that out, I can see that I can use a 
> service call in the <actions> section of the "thread view" screen to 
> walk up the ContentAssoc tree to get the thread ID.
> 
> 
> David E Jones wrote:
> 
>>
>> Is that field really needed? I recommend stepping back and looking at 
>> the process you're trying to do, in real terms of user interaction. 
>> From the stuff here I don't see what that is.
>>
>> If it's a hypothetical "how would I..." then I recommend making it 
>> more concrete or the problem will be difficult to solve.
>>
>> -David
>>
>>
>> Adrian Crum wrote:
>>
>>> Al,
>>>
>>> Thank you for the reply!
>>>
>>> I'm hesitant to add another field that is specific to forums. As 
>>> David has pointed out, ownerContentId is intended to be used for 
>>> security purposes and right now it contains the forum ID - I don't 
>>> want to change that.
>>>
>>> How about a field named contentGroupId? Then other parts of the 
>>> content manager can use it for grouping content records.
>>>
>>> I'll think about it more over the weekend.
>>>
>>> -Adrian
>>>
>>> Al Byers wrote:
>>>
>>>> Adrian,
>>>>
>>>> There are so many things about this that I cannot think of and, 
>>>> hopefully,
>>>> David will be able to comment. The InstanceOfContentId field is used 
>>>> in a
>>>> mode where content is derived from a template. I don't think that there
>>>> would be any conflicts in its use, but I am guessing the right 
>>>> philosophy is
>>>> that if it is needed, you should add another field to the entity.
>>>>
>>>> The ownerContentId is another field that could be used. I have used 
>>>> it for
>>>> that purpose before. It is suppose to be used to identify the 
>>>> content record
>>>> from which security permissions should be determined and, generally, 
>>>> that
>>>> would be the content that starts a thread. The only place that that 
>>>> would
>>>> not work is if in the middle of a thread, two or more parties wanted 
>>>> to send
>>>> private messages to each other. But if that were the case, it would 
>>>> probably
>>>> constitute a new thread.
>>>>
>>>> I think I would lean towards adding a new field, then it would be 
>>>> the use of
>>>> ownerContentId and then instanceOfContentId. But, like I said, I am not
>>>> certain enough about any of those options to be definitive.
>>>>
>>>> -Al
>>>>
>>>> On 8/23/07, Adrian Crum <ad...@hlmksw.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I think I've mapped out the basic entity usage for forums. I wanted 
>>>>> to see
>>>>> if it's okay to use an
>>>>> unused field to hold the forum thread ID. I know I can start with any
>>>>> ContentAssoc record and walk
>>>>> up the tree to find the ID of the uppermost message (the thread 
>>>>> start) but
>>>>> since forums (and
>>>>> threads) can contain thousands of messages this approach is far too
>>>>> inefficient.
>>>>>
>>>>> Currently the Content.InstanceOfContentId field isn't used in forum
>>>>> messages. It seems like an
>>>>> appropriate place to store a thread ID, since the message can be 
>>>>> thought
>>>>> of as an instance of a thread.
>>>>>
>>>>> What do you think?
>>>>>
>>>>> -Adrian
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
> 

Re: Content Manager Question #2

[Adrian Crum <ad...@hlmksw.com>]

Let's say you're viewing a screen of recent forum messages, most recent on top. Clicking on a 
message of interest takes you to a screen where all the messages in that thread are listed - so you 
can see the message of interest in context.

If the first screen is generated from a list of Content Generic Values, then the thread ID for each 
Content needs to be known so that it can be used as a url parameter to get to the "thread view" screen.

lol - now that I've typed all that out, I can see that I can use a service call in the <actions> 
section of the "thread view" screen to walk up the ContentAssoc tree to get the thread ID.


David E Jones wrote:

> 
> Is that field really needed? I recommend stepping back and looking at 
> the process you're trying to do, in real terms of user interaction. From 
> the stuff here I don't see what that is.
> 
> If it's a hypothetical "how would I..." then I recommend making it more 
> concrete or the problem will be difficult to solve.
> 
> -David
> 
> 
> Adrian Crum wrote:
> 
>> Al,
>>
>> Thank you for the reply!
>>
>> I'm hesitant to add another field that is specific to forums. As David 
>> has pointed out, ownerContentId is intended to be used for security 
>> purposes and right now it contains the forum ID - I don't want to 
>> change that.
>>
>> How about a field named contentGroupId? Then other parts of the 
>> content manager can use it for grouping content records.
>>
>> I'll think about it more over the weekend.
>>
>> -Adrian
>>
>> Al Byers wrote:
>>
>>> Adrian,
>>>
>>> There are so many things about this that I cannot think of and, 
>>> hopefully,
>>> David will be able to comment. The InstanceOfContentId field is used 
>>> in a
>>> mode where content is derived from a template. I don't think that there
>>> would be any conflicts in its use, but I am guessing the right 
>>> philosophy is
>>> that if it is needed, you should add another field to the entity.
>>>
>>> The ownerContentId is another field that could be used. I have used 
>>> it for
>>> that purpose before. It is suppose to be used to identify the content 
>>> record
>>> from which security permissions should be determined and, generally, 
>>> that
>>> would be the content that starts a thread. The only place that that 
>>> would
>>> not work is if in the middle of a thread, two or more parties wanted 
>>> to send
>>> private messages to each other. But if that were the case, it would 
>>> probably
>>> constitute a new thread.
>>>
>>> I think I would lean towards adding a new field, then it would be the 
>>> use of
>>> ownerContentId and then instanceOfContentId. But, like I said, I am not
>>> certain enough about any of those options to be definitive.
>>>
>>> -Al
>>>
>>> On 8/23/07, Adrian Crum <ad...@hlmksw.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I think I've mapped out the basic entity usage for forums. I wanted 
>>>> to see
>>>> if it's okay to use an
>>>> unused field to hold the forum thread ID. I know I can start with any
>>>> ContentAssoc record and walk
>>>> up the tree to find the ID of the uppermost message (the thread 
>>>> start) but
>>>> since forums (and
>>>> threads) can contain thousands of messages this approach is far too
>>>> inefficient.
>>>>
>>>> Currently the Content.InstanceOfContentId field isn't used in forum
>>>> messages. It seems like an
>>>> appropriate place to store a thread ID, since the message can be 
>>>> thought
>>>> of as an instance of a thread.
>>>>
>>>> What do you think?
>>>>
>>>> -Adrian
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
> 

Re: Content Manager Question #2

[David E Jones <jo...@hotwaxmedia.com>]

Is that field really needed? I recommend stepping back and looking at the process you're trying to do, in real terms of user interaction. From the stuff here I don't see what that is.

If it's a hypothetical "how would I..." then I recommend making it more concrete or the problem will be difficult to solve.

-David


Adrian Crum wrote:
> Al,
> 
> Thank you for the reply!
> 
> I'm hesitant to add another field that is specific to forums. As David 
> has pointed out, ownerContentId is intended to be used for security 
> purposes and right now it contains the forum ID - I don't want to change 
> that.
> 
> How about a field named contentGroupId? Then other parts of the content 
> manager can use it for grouping content records.
> 
> I'll think about it more over the weekend.
> 
> -Adrian
> 
> Al Byers wrote:
>> Adrian,
>>
>> There are so many things about this that I cannot think of and, 
>> hopefully,
>> David will be able to comment. The InstanceOfContentId field is used in a
>> mode where content is derived from a template. I don't think that there
>> would be any conflicts in its use, but I am guessing the right 
>> philosophy is
>> that if it is needed, you should add another field to the entity.
>>
>> The ownerContentId is another field that could be used. I have used it 
>> for
>> that purpose before. It is suppose to be used to identify the content 
>> record
>> from which security permissions should be determined and, generally, that
>> would be the content that starts a thread. The only place that that would
>> not work is if in the middle of a thread, two or more parties wanted 
>> to send
>> private messages to each other. But if that were the case, it would 
>> probably
>> constitute a new thread.
>>
>> I think I would lean towards adding a new field, then it would be the 
>> use of
>> ownerContentId and then instanceOfContentId. But, like I said, I am not
>> certain enough about any of those options to be definitive.
>>
>> -Al
>>
>> On 8/23/07, Adrian Crum <ad...@hlmksw.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I think I've mapped out the basic entity usage for forums. I wanted 
>>> to see
>>> if it's okay to use an
>>> unused field to hold the forum thread ID. I know I can start with any
>>> ContentAssoc record and walk
>>> up the tree to find the ID of the uppermost message (the thread 
>>> start) but
>>> since forums (and
>>> threads) can contain thousands of messages this approach is far too
>>> inefficient.
>>>
>>> Currently the Content.InstanceOfContentId field isn't used in forum
>>> messages. It seems like an
>>> appropriate place to store a thread ID, since the message can be thought
>>> of as an instance of a thread.
>>>
>>> What do you think?
>>>
>>> -Adrian
>>>
>>>
>>
>>

Re: Content Manager Question #2

[Adrian Crum <ad...@hlmksw.com>]

Al,

Thank you for the reply!

I'm hesitant to add another field that is specific to forums. As David has pointed out, 
ownerContentId is intended to be used for security purposes and right now it contains the forum ID - 
I don't want to change that.

How about a field named contentGroupId? Then other parts of the content manager can use it for 
grouping content records.

I'll think about it more over the weekend.

-Adrian

Al Byers wrote:
> Adrian,
> 
> There are so many things about this that I cannot think of and, hopefully,
> David will be able to comment. The InstanceOfContentId field is used in a
> mode where content is derived from a template. I don't think that there
> would be any conflicts in its use, but I am guessing the right philosophy is
> that if it is needed, you should add another field to the entity.
> 
> The ownerContentId is another field that could be used. I have used it for
> that purpose before. It is suppose to be used to identify the content record
> from which security permissions should be determined and, generally, that
> would be the content that starts a thread. The only place that that would
> not work is if in the middle of a thread, two or more parties wanted to send
> private messages to each other. But if that were the case, it would probably
> constitute a new thread.
> 
> I think I would lean towards adding a new field, then it would be the use of
> ownerContentId and then instanceOfContentId. But, like I said, I am not
> certain enough about any of those options to be definitive.
> 
> -Al
> 
> On 8/23/07, Adrian Crum <ad...@hlmksw.com> wrote:
> 
>>I think I've mapped out the basic entity usage for forums. I wanted to see
>>if it's okay to use an
>>unused field to hold the forum thread ID. I know I can start with any
>>ContentAssoc record and walk
>>up the tree to find the ID of the uppermost message (the thread start) but
>>since forums (and
>>threads) can contain thousands of messages this approach is far too
>>inefficient.
>>
>>Currently the Content.InstanceOfContentId field isn't used in forum
>>messages. It seems like an
>>appropriate place to store a thread ID, since the message can be thought
>>of as an instance of a thread.
>>
>>What do you think?
>>
>>-Adrian
>>
>>
> 
> 

Re: Content Manager Question #2

[Al Byers <by...@automationgroups.com>]

Adrian,

There are so many things about this that I cannot think of and, hopefully,
David will be able to comment. The InstanceOfContentId field is used in a
mode where content is derived from a template. I don't think that there
would be any conflicts in its use, but I am guessing the right philosophy is
that if it is needed, you should add another field to the entity.

The ownerContentId is another field that could be used. I have used it for
that purpose before. It is suppose to be used to identify the content record
from which security permissions should be determined and, generally, that
would be the content that starts a thread. The only place that that would
not work is if in the middle of a thread, two or more parties wanted to send
private messages to each other. But if that were the case, it would probably
constitute a new thread.

I think I would lean towards adding a new field, then it would be the use of
ownerContentId and then instanceOfContentId. But, like I said, I am not
certain enough about any of those options to be definitive.

-Al

On 8/23/07, Adrian Crum <ad...@hlmksw.com> wrote:
>
> I think I've mapped out the basic entity usage for forums. I wanted to see
> if it's okay to use an
> unused field to hold the forum thread ID. I know I can start with any
> ContentAssoc record and walk
> up the tree to find the ID of the uppermost message (the thread start) but
> since forums (and
> threads) can contain thousands of messages this approach is far too
> inefficient.
>
> Currently the Content.InstanceOfContentId field isn't used in forum
> messages. It seems like an
> appropriate place to store a thread ID, since the message can be thought
> of as an instance of a thread.
>
> What do you think?
>
> -Adrian
>
>