You might want to Google around the wiki and the forums to see if this has ever been mentioned as a roadmap item. Seems like it would be a common feature request.

Jeff

I am new to Alfresco Share 3.2. My client requirement is like parent-child site concept.

Example:

Parent site :A
Child sites : B,C,D
Each child sites contains sub sites like,
B contians B1,B2 sites,C contains C1,C2 etc.

Is it possible to create sub sites under site ?

Can you please explain?

Thanks in advance

Varun

Yep. I’m not sure why they don’t check that more strictly. It also works with aspects–you can set a property that belongs to an aspect even if the aspect has not been applied. And in both cases, those properties are indexed and searchable by Lucene which I think is even more bizarre. Of course if you do a search based on the type, an ancestor type, or the aspect, you won’t get a hit, but I still agree with you: Alfresco should throw an exception if you’re trying to set a property that’s not defined as the document’s type or in any of its aspects.

Jeff

I think I found an answer to my previous posting in the comments on this blog http://ecmarchitect.com/archives/2007/06/09/756 – in particular your reply to Tony’s posting.

I am slightly confused however by the inheritance provided by the content model. After reading your reply i wrote a simple script to set the campaign (seeing as it isn’t exposed to the web client) as follows -

document.properties["sc:campaign"] = “Social Shopping”;
document.save();

I executed the script against a Whitepaper content type. I then previewed the item using the doc_info template and the above property was correctly reflected. However I then executed the same script against a Someco Legal Document type expecting some sort of exception, yet the preview revealed that the document quite happily accepted that property.

This seems to break the inheritance model provided by the content model. Is there nothing to enforce this other than developer discipline?

Thanks
George

This may not be related to the above discussion but does have to do with customising Alfresco’s content model.

I was wondering whether you may provide further insight into Chapter 3 of your book Alfresco Developer Guide?

Under the section Properties and Property Types in Chapter 3 you mention that the content type Whitepaper will inherit the campaign property from it’s parent type MarketingDoc. I have downloaded the sample code and extended a fresh install of Alfresco 3.2 with your custom content model. Yet when i add new content of the type Whitepaper, the only property inherited is the association.

Admittedly i have not tried this in any earlier version. Do you know if Alfresco 3.2 is backwards compatible with the example you have provided?

Thanks in advance
George

Thanks a lot for providing valuable information on share. This is really useful stuff.

We tried working with blogs and discussions in share. We faced following problem. May be you could give us proper pointers on what we could have missed out.

Following is what we have done.

We created a site by using the admin privileges. Also created couple of users through alfresco web client. We are able to log on to the alfresco share application with those user ids as well. Then we invited couple of users to the site created by admin (with admin login). With admin user id, we also created a blog and a thread.
Then we logged in with these invited user ids and tried to add comments to blog and threads. But, when we click on read of a blog we don’t see the comments text area. In fact there is nothing for the user to add a comment. We tried giving different prvileges (like contributor, collaborator etc) to the invited users, but we are not able to add comments to a blog or create a blog. Same thing with discussions.

Also the create blog and create topic(discussion) links are disabled for these users.

We tried to create the site with these user ids. The user who created the site is having these privileges. But the users that are invited to the site are not able to do the same.

Are we missing anything? It seems that we have missed some basic configuration as these are basic things.

Regards,
Pratap

Jeff

Thanks
JMi