Configuring the 'Change Type' Document Action

Options
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
10-27-2009 06:02 AM
Is updating the types.get.config.xml file with static elements the only way to define available "Change Type" list options?
Thanks all,
-ryan
Thanks all,
-ryan
Labels:
- Labels:
-
Archive
3 REPLIES 3
Options
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
10-27-2009 07:31 AM
If by updating, you mean "overriding using the extension mechanism"… then yes. We do have plans to try and centralize Share configuration in a future release.
Thanks,
Mike
Thanks,
Mike

Options
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
10-27-2009 06:53 PM
that's correct.
I was more interested in the static control over the elements. Is it yet known if there will be a property on content types that will allow its children to be "changeable/selectable"? Or perhaps allow for a webscript to be executed to build the config file, or an individual element group (i.e., <type>…</type>).
Basically, is it known if there will be any way to dynamically inherit or populate the change types?
I'll keep my eye out for the centralized Share configs. thanks for the update!
-ryan
I was more interested in the static control over the elements. Is it yet known if there will be a property on content types that will allow its children to be "changeable/selectable"? Or perhaps allow for a webscript to be executed to build the config file, or an individual element group (i.e., <type>…</type>).
Basically, is it known if there will be any way to dynamically inherit or populate the change types?
I'll keep my eye out for the centralized Share configs. thanks for the update!
-ryan
Options
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
10-28-2009 04:19 AM
I believe it will remain a manual configuration for the foreseeable future, as it is for the JSF client today.
Thanks,
Mike
Thanks,
Mike
