cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Bruno Dumon <br...@outerthought.org>
Subject Re: Bastardized URL protocol (was Re: [RT] ComponentizedProcessor)
Date Wed, 12 Nov 2003 17:17:17 GMT
On Wed, 2003-11-12 at 12:50, Berin Loritsch wrote:
> Bruno Dumon wrote:
> > On Wed, 2003-11-12 at 12:19, Berin Loritsch wrote:
> > 
> >>>
> >>>>Instead I would highly encourage you to provide a way to set the base
> >>>>URL where relative URLs would be resolved to.
> >>>>
> >>>>Work *with* the contract instead of extending it in non-intuitive ways.
> >>>>
> >>>>See my rant in another email.
> >>
> >>Again see my rant in the other email.  There are HUGE differnces in the
> >>way the URL is interpreted based on the existence of a repetitive character.
> >>It should be more obvious than that.
> > 
> > 
> > I somewhat agree with your rant, but I don't see the situation in Cocoon
> > changing any time soon since it would break backwards compatibility. I
> > find the cocoon:/ versus cocoon:// convenient to use though.
> 
> If I recall, I raised a hissy fit then too--I really don't like it.
> 
> > 
> > BTW, there was a little error in your rant:
> > context://path/to/current/context/ should have been
> > context:///path/to/current/context/
> 
> See what I mean?
> 
> And yes, I find this to be even more troublesome.
> 
> Just how many forward slashes do you really need?

Ah, I wasn't clear enough: the three slashes are what you are asking
for, not what the situation currently is. According to the standard URL
path notation, the part after the first two slashes identifies the
authority (hostname usually). You see, seems like even the standard
isn't known well enough ;-) (or else I misunderstood the intend of your
remark)

-- 
Bruno Dumon                             http://outerthought.org/
Outerthought - Open Source, Java & XML Competence Support Center
bruno@outerthought.org                          bruno@apache.org


Mime
View raw message