Karsten W. Rohrbach wrote: > Thanks for the quick reply. However, configurable containers with > configurable collections of content is one of the more prominent use > cases for a publishing platform (IMVHO) and I somehow took the "Django > is for creating CMSes" phrase too literally, it seems.
Though I never actually designed publishing systems there is a very general thing that is called 'object-relational impedance mismatch'[1]. It basically says that principles of organization of an object oriented program differ in essence from those of a relational database. Inheritance and unified collection of objects of base and derived classes are very common for OO design but they just don't have their direct counterpart in a relational database. In practice this means that when you try to abstract a database away and just map an object model into it transparently it won't work smooth. Django, by design, doesn't try to hide a database structure from a user. So designing a Django models around pure object oriented concepts is really asking for more work than it should take. [1]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Object-Relational_Impedance_Mismatch --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django users" group. To post to this group, send email to django-users@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-users?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
