Customisable admin interface

Next topic

Author	Message
Paul Forsyth	Friday 03 October 2003 2:14:00 am The admin interface could have a section from which admins specified what access lesser users (editors, anyone but admins) have to the admin interface. So, locations like 'shop', 'Extension setup', 'RAD', etc would not be shown. I understand 3.3 will allow the admin to be reskinned but it would be great if more was controllable by the admin... :) At the moment i have to change the templates by hand to reduce the functionality. paul
Paul Forsyth	Friday 03 October 2003 3:45:08 am Following on from this. With the ability to customise the admin interface for users it would be natural to have example profiles for different types of users. The control of what is displayed may be through the admin or an ini file. One problem here is the separation of the presentation from the role. If a link is given the role usually has to be updated to allow that link to work for the user. The role function could itself allow a user/group to be set up with specific roles in categories and the admin would then display these categories as menus with links. A simple extension could use the url translation mechanism to assign urls users would use to access the functions. On one hand i like that user access is explicit, no (* * *) for some. But on the other if the list is too complex there may be too many options and may hinder maintanence - can't see the wood for the trees syndrome. paul

Author

Message

Friday 03 October 2003 2:14:00 am

The admin interface could have a section from which admins specified what access lesser users (editors, anyone but admins) have to the admin interface.

So, locations like 'shop', 'Extension setup', 'RAD', etc would not be shown.

I understand 3.3 will allow the admin to be reskinned but it would be great if more was controllable by the admin... :)

At the moment i have to change the templates by hand to reduce the functionality.

paul

Paul Forsyth

Friday 03 October 2003 3:45:08 am

Following on from this.

With the ability to customise the admin interface for users it would be natural to have example profiles for different types of users. The control of what is displayed may be through the admin or an ini file.

One problem here is the separation of the presentation from the role. If a link is given the role usually has to be updated to allow that link to work for the user.

The role function could itself allow a user/group to be set up with specific roles in categories and the admin would then display these categories as menus with links. A simple extension could use the url translation mechanism to assign urls users would use to access the functions.

On one hand i like that user access is explicit, no (* * *) for some. But on the other if the list is too complex there may be too many options and may hinder maintanence - can't see the wood for the trees syndrome.

paul