Forums / Setup & design / Sections versus Content Folders - what's the distinction?

Sections versus Content Folders - what's the distinction?

Previous topic

Setup & design

Next topic

Author	Message
Paul Brandt	Monday 05 June 2006 6:56:54 am Hi, I'm not sure what the difference is between <i>content folders</i> and <i>sections</i>. As far as I can derive from the various documents, content folders define the site structure. At the other hand Sections "are virtual collections of nodes that belong together, either conceptually or functionally" (ref. Learning Ez Publish 3). Since a site will be designed such that its structure reflects a logical comprehension of its content, Content Folders are also collections of content (i.e. nodes) that belong together. Hence, the two concepts do not seem to differ much, at least not from the perspective that they both structure your content. The only difference I can observe is in their appliance: Where Content Folders are applied to structure the content for the sole purpose of the way the users view your website, Sections seem to be applied as a pivot between content and access rights. In other words, Sections define a content structure that is used to establish the user priviliges. Since one can assign content to belong to a section, and one can define permissions for each user or user group to sections, that effectively implies <i>who</i> is allowed to <i>act</i> on what <i>content</i>. I presume I'm correct so far. Now, when one assigns content to a section, one can select Content Folders as "start location for the section", or any other type of content one has instantiated so far. In my opinion, in this way there is no difference anymore between Sections and Content. Why not assign permissions to the content tree directly? Why this intermediary Section concept? This is making things only more complex without adding extra dynamics or logic, doesn't it? Or am I missing something? Thanks in advance for enlightening me here. Paul
Mark Marsiglio	Monday 05 June 2006 8:10:00 am We used to use sections for establishing user access rights by using section limitations on the roles. However, lately, we have found it easier to use a subtree limitation based on content for this purpose, rather than sections which require an extra step for the same outcome. The uses of sections that I think still stands out is the ability to create overrides based on sections, and the ability to assign the same section to multiple content trees. That being said, we don't use sections in most of our sites. On one that we used them on, we created a section that is only visible to logged in editors, allowing entire sub-sections of the site to be created offline, invisible to anonymous and guest users. Once the section was done, we switched the section to the standard section to make the new section visible to all users. http://www.thinkcreative.com Turning Ideas Into Strategic Solutions

Author

Message

Paul Brandt

Monday 05 June 2006 6:56:54 am

Hi,

I'm not sure what the difference is between content folders and sections. As far as I can derive from the various documents, content folders define the site structure. At the other hand Sections "are virtual collections of nodes that belong together, either conceptually or functionally" (ref. Learning Ez Publish 3).

Since a site will be designed such that its structure reflects a logical comprehension of its content, Content Folders are also collections of content (i.e. nodes) that belong together. Hence, the two concepts do not seem to differ much, at least not from the perspective that they both structure your content.

The only difference I can observe is in their appliance: Where Content Folders are applied to structure the content for the sole purpose of the way the users view your website, Sections seem to be applied as a pivot between content and access rights. In other words, Sections define a content structure that is used to establish the user priviliges. Since one can assign content to belong to a section, and one can define permissions for each user or user group to sections, that effectively implies who is allowed to act on what content.

I presume I'm correct so far. Now, when one assigns content to a section, one can select Content Folders as "start location for the section", or any other type of content one has instantiated so far. In my opinion, in this way there is no difference anymore between Sections and Content. Why not assign permissions to the content tree directly? Why this intermediary Section concept? This is making things only more complex without adding extra dynamics or logic, doesn't it?

Or am I missing something?

Thanks in advance for enlightening me here.
Paul

Mark Marsiglio

Monday 05 June 2006 8:10:00 am

We used to use sections for establishing user access rights by using section limitations on the roles. However, lately, we have found it easier to use a subtree limitation based on content for this purpose, rather than sections which require an extra step for the same outcome.

The uses of sections that I think still stands out is the ability to create overrides based on sections, and the ability to assign the same section to multiple content trees.

That being said, we don't use sections in most of our sites. On one that we used them on, we created a section that is only visible to logged in editors, allowing entire sub-sections of the site to be created offline, invisible to anonymous and guest users. Once the section was done, we switched the section to the standard section to make the new section visible to all users.

http://www.thinkcreative.com
Turning Ideas Into Strategic Solutions