forrest-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ross Gardler <>
Subject Re: Why is default start page fixed on index.html?
Date Mon, 02 May 2005 12:12:13 GMT

(this is now a dev discussion and should be moved to the dev list - I've 
set the reply-to header on this mail - interested people should follow 
it there)

comments inline...

Ferdinand Soethe wrote:
> Ross Gardler wrote:
>>Again, I don't think this is a "problem" it is standard for web
>>servers to default to index.html.
> While I can see where this setting is coming from, and think that it
> makes sense to have this as an implicit setting for directories where
> not start-page is named, I don't think that we should keep this for
> the sites start-page for two reasons:

My point is that something has to be the default, somewhere you have to 
tell Forrest where to start.

Of course, our current behaviour follows the standard behaviour of web 
servers and therefore I agree that there is an argument for making it 
more configurable for use in other use cases.

However, as things stand it *is* configurable so there is no limitations 
as to what an individual user chooses as their start page so the 
argument about different languages and use cases does not convince me, 
not sure about others though (given that I agree it should be more 
easily configured).

Having said that Cyriaque raises a good point with respect to skins 
depending on "index.html" to decide on some content. This is something 
we should address in views.

> - The internal logic of site would benefit a lot if we used the
>   attribute href in the site-element to determine which page to open
>   first. And if no href is given or it is empty, fine use index.html
>   as startup like before and in any other directory.

This will require some preprocessing of the site.xml file to extract the 
start URL. However, we can't do that because we don't know that a 
site.xml file is being provided since this is an internal format, not 
necessarily the source format.

>   Sounds to me like a very consistent approach. Is it difficult to
>   change that?

Don't know, but it will not be as simple as you may think (see above).


View raw message