no no no no no no no no

:)

  --Ethan McCutchen.....Thu Feb 24 03:18:10 -0800 2011

if you want access to that stuff, put it in a card.

  --Ethan McCutchen.....Thu Feb 24 03:18:41 -0800 2011

If it isn't in an actual card, maybe the API could provide a way to supply content for virtual cards? I think we may want that, but we need to think about the implications.

  --Gerry Gleason.....Thu Feb 24 04:47:30 -0800 2011

That's what I was thinking. Suppose you love Wagn, and want an install now to handle lots of things. And, you have legacy data in another system that for various reasons you aren't going to import right away. You want it to be visible in Wagn as cards and there's a module that lets you do that (as Virtual cards), but then people are surprised when that content doesn't show up when they Search for it. You're still not ready to import Wagn (maybe the legacy system integrates with things that Wagn doesn't). Hence, this ticket.

  --John Abbe.....Thu Feb 24 10:51:00 -0800 2011

if it's not a card, it's none of WQL's business. There is no way it's going to be simpler to give WQL access to non-cards than to import. We can make the imported cards slaves of canonical masters that live elsewhere -- I think this is going to be a vital pattern -- but I really really don't want WQL extending tentacles anywhere outside of cards. That blows our modularity, our distributability, and our coherence.

Obviously, we can keep talking about this, and of course I could be wrong about its impracticability, but PLEASE don't suggest to anyone that this is in our path until we've got some more concrete technical vision.

  --Ethan McCutchen.....Mon Aug 08 10:01:23 -0700 2011