<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
Vitor Varalonga schrieb:
<blockquote
cite="mid3c19a7bc0606191022x62895d7fi38da11e867677106@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<meta http-equiv="Context-Type"
content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1">
<div>Hi!</div>
<div> </div>
<div> </div>
<div>I found out the following URL regarding new Resource Type
creation:</div>
<div> </div>
<div><a href="http://www.opencms-forum.de/viewtopic.php?t=625">http://www.opencms-forum.de/viewtopic.php?t=625</a></div>
<div> </div>
<div>As you may see by reading through the thread on the
abovementioned</div>
<div>URL, on a primary approach, besides creating a XSD schema, you
have to</div>
<div>edit the file opencms-modules.xml.</div>
<div>But on a following post, the approach is quite different since
the files opencms-vfs.xml</div>
<div>and opencms-workplace.xml are edited instead of
opencms-modules.xml.</div>
<div>Does each one of these approaches correspond to a distinct goal
or might one</div>
<div>(or both) of them be incomplete or wrong?</div>
<div> </div>
<div> </div>
<div>kind regards,</div>
<div>-- <br>
Vítor Varalonga<br>
CIBERBIT - Produções de Software S.A. </div>
</blockquote>
Hi,<br>
<br>
you should use opencms-modules.xml<br>
In this file you can enter both the filesystem information as well as
the workplace-related information for your new resource type. <br>
<br>
<div>opencms-vfs.xml and opencms-workplace.xml *could* be used to do
the same, but you *should* better use opencms-modules.xml, because
opencms-modules.xml is meant for extensions and the other two are meant
for system-related stuff.<br>
<br>
Only, if you define your files-modules.xml, will they be exported
together with your module, as soon as you try to export it into a zip
file.<br>
<br>
hth<br>
christian<br>
<br>
</div>
<br>
<br>
</body>
</html>