--- Dave Howorth <dhoworth at mrc-lmb.cam.ac.uk> wrote:
> Peter Speltz wrote:
> > --- Dave Howorth <Dave.Howorth at acm.org> wrote:
> >>ok_tables is a little different, to my mind. In standard Maypole, it's
> >>just a cache for display_tables, which in turn is an extremely simple
> >>and limited access control system (there are tables everyone can access
> >>and there are hidden tables that no-one can access).
> >
> > Ah dave, can't you be persuaded?
>
> Oh dear, I think you're a little too far away to buy me a beer ...
>
Too bad.
> > ok_tables is the one in power, the one that's
> > checked for access. The key difference is "display". Maypole provides
> ability
> > for one to distinguish between talbes they want advertised to user for
> access
> > and tables that user can access but are not necessarily need to be
> advertised.
> > That's why tabs are made of display tables rather than ok_tables. Internal
> > maypole simply adds display tables to ok_tables. ok_tables is really the
> one in
> > power and not display tables. It's just there to help simplify the view of
> the
> > system. A significant difference if you ask me and you give way too much
> > credit to display_tables which could be deleted without adverse effects on
> > anything but the view. :)
>
> AFAIK, Maypole uses display_tables as the default for ok_tables. If you
> supply your own list for ok_tables, there's no connection between the
> two as far as the program is concerned.
>
That's right. and display_tables then is only used by view and for some weird
reason in debugging which if you specify this:
display_tables('dog', 'cat', 'BEAR');
ok_tables('dog', 'cat');
and you try to go to a 'BEAR' action you get a message like this:
"BEAR: we don't have that table. Tables are 'cat', 'dog', 'BEAR'"
that's always fun to see that.
> ok_tables is only used in is_applicable() and that is basically doing
> authorization/existence checks on both the class and action, but not in
> a user-sensitive way. Indeed, it is run before the user is authenticated
> so it's impossible for it to be used in a user-based access control
> scheme. So IMHO, as soon as you install a user-based scheme,
> is_applicable and ok_tables become irrelevant. I guess I'll probably
> override it to sub is_applicable { return OK } and have to provide some
> other user-based means of detecting and handling 'plain' templates.
> display_tables will be dynamically computed for each user based on
> permissions, I expect, though I may well base the navigation on your menu.
>
I like the sound of this. But what about ok_tables?. Do you think it's not
important to have a set of tables for tabs or whatever organization layout
you're using and then others that can be accessed behind scenes or link too.
This discussion is feeling awfully like dejavu but i can't remember coming to a
conclusion. :) i promise these are my last words on it. :)
> Cheers, Dave
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> maypole mailing list
> maypole at lists.netthink.co.uk
> http://lists.netthink.co.uk/listinfo/maypole
>
=====
pjs
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The all-new My Yahoo! - Get yours free!
http://my.yahoo.com
_______________________________________________
maypole mailing list
maypole at lists.netthink.co.uk
http://lists.netthink.co.uk/listinfo/maypole
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Thu Feb 24 2005 - 22:25:58 GMT