forrest-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Nicola Ken Barozzi <>
Subject Re: Different views for the same source file
Date Wed, 31 Aug 2005 15:21:29 GMT
Ross Gardler wrote:
> Tim Williams wrote:
>> It sounds like Cocoon's "Views" would be more appropriate, allowing
>> you to do something like this:
>> Your use-case sounds a lot like the description of cocoon views. Maybe
>> you're not going that route for a reason though?
> Using a parameter in the URL is not an option since these do not make
> for valid filenames and therefore it is impossible to generate a static
> site (a requirement in this use case).
> You see, ultimately, I would like to be able to provide a parameterised
> template that would allow *users* to specifiy what is in their view by
> editing a config file. I'm just working out where the best palce to do
> this is. Prior to forrest:views I would, without hesitation, have done
> it in the sitemap. Now I can see that it may be possible in
> forrest:views (I'm not saying this is the right thing to do though).

We already had this discussion (without the views implication part).

In practice, pdf output, text output, html output, etc are different
"views" already, and they differentiate only for the extension.

This can and should be generalized, also because in an ideal web, there
would be no extension, just a request that is given the best content
given the client capabilities.

The result was that to specify manually the output type, the name of the
file would have to change, in a way similar to what is used by Apache
HTTPD for multilingual sites.

Damn, I don't remember the thread, but we had come up with a decision on
how to define the filename. Rats.

Nicola Ken Barozzi         
            - verba volant, scripta manent -
   (discussions get forgotten, just code remains)

View raw message