Usability Team

It seems strange to just give everyone those right allthough it does seems to be done like that in practise. I remember whem implementing that we would recursively change the permissions every time and that it always took some time to realise that this person did not have the correct right because another one created. You can however set typoscript on a particular part of the tree to enforce the permissions upon creation of a page.

Another alternative we used to address these issues is be_acl from Sebastian Kurfuerst. That extension gives a lot more control over permissions. Maybe some extra effort should be done to make that one a core feature.

@Ben: Sounds good with be_acl. I don't know that extension but it seems to improve things...

You have to have a group that's manually given access under the "Access"-module for the tree to give an editor the ability to show,edit,delete pages etc. An editor has to be part of that group, or the effect is he isn't able to see the tree, though he has a treemount for himself.

If an editor creates a page by default the page gets the group the editor is a member of. Other editors can't see that particular page. It would be better if by default a page would get the group-ownership "All users" (in this case), so that other editors can see, edit, delete etc. this page.

Or alternatively "Everybody" should be allowed to edit every page, so that the other problems above don't exist by default.

If I got your point right, Lars, I don't think ACL will solve it any way.
The major point of the ACL (Access Control Lists) is to have multiple
Rules on one major Access node (eg. Page with multiple user groups.)

@Steffen: Sounds like a simple plan. #like
For now, the Introduction Package serves this "somehow". :)

As sad in the other Tickets .. let's discuss that topic in general and
than publish our Suggestion or Solution UI/UX wise here.

Greez Jens