Yes, but unless I'm mistaken, that won't help my content-ownership problem. I can restrict editing to ANY owner in a given section, but I don't want to have to create a new section for each company. Not only would that be a hassle, but I just feel that's the wrong way to go about things.
What I need to do is restrict editing/access to any user that's in the same company. The role-policy systems doesn't provide an interface to allow me to restrict access by the user's group. The restriction setup (for editing) is as follows
Content-Class >> Section >> Owner
the way I see it, in the existing role system, I need to be able to specify a different owner other than "Any" or "Self"
It would think it is perfectly sane to have a different section for each company?
In fact, if I were the customer I wouldn't particularly like it to even be on the same installation than my competitor. Imagine what happens if there is permission fuck up somewhere... But as always, YMMV.
Okay, unless I can wrap my brain around this situation in a more efficient manner, creating a new section and associated roles for each new company seems like a terrible headache (this would need to be done automatically, not babysat by an admin)
I'd much rather have pre-defined sections and roles that apply to each company. Really, what I need to be able to do is change ownership of content to the user-group (or a custom class that's like a group)
The only way for now to achieve this for now is sections. You can automate some things with workflows. I think in 3.1 will come a possibility to create limitations to the subtree in that case you scenario will be easier to build.
You must be logged in to post messages in this topic!
