forrest-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ross Gardler <>
Subject Re: Avoiding fixed uri spaces (Re: [jira] Commented: (FOR-662) content-source-xml-link contract breaks 'forrest site')
Date Mon, 05 Sep 2005 05:58:32 GMT
Tim Williams wrote:
> On 9/4/05, Ross Gardler <> wrote:


>>I believe the issue that arose because of the addition of the
>>*.source.xml matchers is a result of the fixing og the path part of the
>>URL, rather than a problem of the "extension" part.
> It's the implementation of the extension (adding a new matcher or
> ensuring that all matchers account for all the different "hints" that
> I thought needed re-thinking.  

Yes, I thought so. This is caused by the fixing of the path part, 
imagine that if there was no special matcher for the 
"pluginDocs/index.xml" file in the sitemap. In this case there would be 
no need for the new matcher for "pluginDocs/index.source.xml" since it 
would have been matched by the catch-all "**.source.xml".

If we remove the need to fix the path (using the locationmap?) then the 
problem does not exist and the hints in the URL are OK (at least I think 

> Anyway, don't worry, the status qou
> works.

For now...

>> >   I still think there might be room for an
>> > enhanced Cocoon View in here - reacting to the "hint" in
>> > fname.hint.xml instead of the current request parameter.  I don't know
>> > though...
>>If you can make Cocoon views work without the request parameter then
>>this would work. Otherwise, it will be impossible to create a static
>>site beause request parameters add an '?' to the URL which is not legal
>>in a filename on disk. Unless you solve that problem you are on to a
>>loser (I've tried it). 'm not saying it won't work, I'm saying there is
>>a problem that needs to be addressed, I hope identifying the problem
>>will save you some time in experimentation ;-)
> I'm not constraining my thinking by the current Cocoon->View
> implementation.  At the bottom of their own docs, they suggest that a
> future possible view accessor might be to react on a URI exstension --
> so why not our "hint" in fname.hint.xml? 

I see. OK, we know what to consider if this raises its ugly head again.

> I don't have an itch to fix
> this at the moment and I suppose that the in vogue thing is not to
> have design debate on-list so I'll hush up until I have such an itch
> -- with the latest patch it's working fine.


I think we ought to focus on removing the fixed paths first, maybe that 
itch will never arrive.


View raw message