El jue, 09-03-2006 a las 14:25 +0100, Andreas Hartmann escribió: > Hi Lenya devs, > > I suggested to allow custom DocumentIdToPathMappers for resource types, > but this isn't sufficient for the following reason: > > Resource types should be able to support different file extensions. > (resource type "image" could support .gif, .png, .jpg, .bmp, ...) > > Correct me if I'm wrong, but this would mean that only the document > (or asset, resp.) itself may know about its extension. This could > be solved in at least two ways: > > 1) add the extension to the document identifier > > /foo/bar.xml > /hello/world.png > > 2) add the extension to the meta data > > IMO option (1) is not really useful, because it would require to > add the file extension to the URL. This is fine for images etc., > but rather unusual for XML files (which are typically rendered > as (X)HTML). > > How about adding the extension to the meta data?
Well to the down sides of 1) I am not sure. The biggest limitation ATM in lenya is exactly the fact that we tend to treat xml (xhtml) different from the rest. What you call unusual I call normal. ;) Anyway, I am as well happy to store the extension in the meta data. The only problem is something like: /hello/world.png /hello/world.pdf /hello/world.wav ... Would you then store all this extension in the meta? Further how would you request e.g. /hello/world.pdf? Do you want to pass the extension as param? Or do you want to keep the meta like: /hello/world.wav.meta ... If so what is with meta data (like title,...) that all this different extension may have in common? salu2 -- Thorsten Scherler COO Spain Wyona Inc. - Open Source Content Management - Apache Lenya http://www.wyona.com http://lenya.apache.org [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
