Re: Proposal: User 'Everybody'

[sergey@total-knowledge.com]

I have questions about "group" concept.

Is group qualify as another UMO?
Are they going to be searchable in Repository?
Is bunch of co-authors among with author of this UMO always a group?
Is bunch of translators of this UMO always a group?
Are all translators in UU a group?



> OK. I finally got around to thinking about this problem.
> First thing that comes to my mind when thinking about
> this, is adding a concept of a group.
>
> All rights in this case would be granted to groups of people.
> Each person would have group with only his account in it
> created automatically, for granting individual access.
>
> Each person would belong to "Everybody" group.
>
> Groups can be created by anyone. Membership access rules
> would be same as in my proposal for classes. In fact classes
> are just special case of groups, and would be replaced by
> this proposal.
>
> Then, once group is created, rights can be granted to that
> group.
>
> In example with courses & classes, Author would set group
> access policy (i.e. group admin has to pay, in order to get
> his group access to the object), and teacher would create
> group "classFall2008AbraKadabraCourse", and set membership
> rules for that group, and then would get "study" access to
> the course for this group.
>
> Comments?
>
> Alexey Parshin wrote:
>> For the purposes when we have to allow a certain right to everybody,
>> like: 'Everybody may study this object', it makes sense to have a user
>> 'Everybody' (or 'Public').
>> This change means we have a record with fixed id=2 (id=1 is reserved
>> for no user, or 'Nobody') and is_authorized() stored proc is changed
>> to check the user permissions, and, if not available, public
>> permissions.
>>
>> --
>> Alexey Parshin,
>> http://www.sptk.net
>
> --
> Ilya A. Volynets-Evenbakh
> Total Knowledge. CTO
> http://www.total-knowledge.com
>
>