By dikini on

The ambiguity of the title just demonstrates what I'm on about. There is a difference, an overlap but probably it is insufficient with the current permission system.

We have the node permissions - view,create,delete,update and in parallel we have the "node type permissions", introduced by different modules, for example file upload. Threre as well different autorisation realms, introduced by different modules, for example taxonomy access control. This rich mixture is good. My problem with it is that the realms currently don't cover the "node type" permissions. I might be mistaken though.

I think this should be imroved, it will provide a more consistent configuration for admins.

Are there any particular showstoppers for introducing an interface for "node type permissions" similar to the node permissions?

Is this an issue of the modules implementing the permissions or a core issue. Sorry, I got lost there :)

Comments

gauravb’s picture

gauravb commented

I didn't quite get what you mean by "node type permissions". Can you explain the usage scnario a little bit more?

-Gaurav
http://www.tekritisoftware.com
http://www.newdelhitimes.org

dikini’s picture

dikini commented

bad language. *slap my wrist*.

the permissions you see in access control->permissions. They are introduced by different modules. They are different, although some of them could be extending, from the node(api) permissions. You will see the second ones if you enable taxonomy access control, and look at category permissions.

The problem I see is that while the latter are extended for add-on modules, I don't see how the former could be. And they are important for mixed content (public/private) websites, otherwise things go either ugly or at best confusing.