[Typo3-dev] FE edit concepts

[Daniel Thomas]

Hello list,

as I this is my first posting to this list some brief words about  
myself. My name is Daniel Thomas, I am partner of dpool from Munich and  
have been working continuously with typo3 since last autumn.

To my concern:
As stated by Daniel Hinderink in a thread  
(http://typo3.org/ 
1427+M5f518c29ca5.0.html?&tx_maillisttofaq_pi1%5Banswered_only%5D=0&tx_m 
aillisttofaq_pi1%5Bsword%5D=structural) a couple of weeks ago,  
increasingly, we need to integrate FE-Edit functionality in our  
projects. I have the feeling that typo3 lacks an overall strategy to  
deal with this problem. As I will be spending some time on FE-edit  
functionality in projects in the next couple of weeks I would like to  
discuss some basic questions before in order to see whether some of  
this work might be channelled into solving general FE-edit questions.

Let's have a look at three approaches with little functionality-tags:
fe_adminLib - <comprehensive?>, <with email-workflow>, <HTML-template  
comes from calling script>
julle_feedit - <comprehensive?>, <no workflow>, <script gets styles  
from calling script>
fe_news - <not comprehensive>, <workflow-integration into task  
manager>, <uses custom HTML-template>

I chose the three functionality-tags as I think they are the three  
issues in question.
1. comprehensive
we need a solution which will pretty much mirror the possibilities of  
the forms in the backend. Fields which are defined for the backend must  
be editable in the frontend as well. I am not exacty sure where we  
stand here with regard to fe_adminLib and julle_feedit. Does someone  
know the exact status (especially in terms of how input evaluation is  
integrated in fe_adminLib)? Otherwise I will try to come back to this  
myself in the near future.

2. workflow
the fe_adminLib has some kind of workflow integrated by the  
emailnotifications with commandlinks. That works very well. However, it  
is not the most transparent solution. I mentioned fe_news above because  
it integrates the publication of news added in the frontend into the  
task manager of the admin user. In my opinion this is the better  
solution.

3. templates
the fe_adminLib needs the calling application to provide an  
HTML-template in order to render the forms. julle_feedit provides the  
HTML for the forms formatted by the calling application's stylesheet,  
right? Now, the first approach gives a maximum level of control over  
the way things look; the second a more lightweigt access to the wanted  
functionality.
There is a general question behind this: Do we need a designwise much  
more flexible approach for creating forms in the frontend than in the  
backend? Or: How likely is it that a somehow standardized approach will  
cause a major problem because its look can not be fully adapted to a  
given design?

I would be interested in hearing your opinion about and discussing
A. what kind of workflow-integration a FE-edit function should provide
B. where the actual HTML should come from in rendering the FE-edit  
processes
and
C. what the best technical solution for an integrated framework usable  
for future extensions could look like.

Writing this mail I realize that I am not talking about small stuff  
here. At least not from my perspective. But even if we only describe a  
good solution we are some steps further than we are know.

greetings
daniel