what happens if i have mounts /blog/*/post /blog/foo/post/bar
which one is matched? do we not allow this to happen? i would really hate to see a situation where the order of calls to mount plays into resolution... -igor On Feb 8, 2008 2:42 AM, Gerolf Seitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > hi all, > > i was wondering whether it's possible to have wildcards in mountpaths. > this would give us more flexibility, as it allows page parameters to be > somehow > part of the mount path. > > take for example this mount path: /blog/*/post > the * means that there needs to be exactly one parameter between the path > fragments blog and post. > after the path fragment post, there can be 0 or more parameters, as usual. > > some more thoughts > > # wildcards only make sense when a page is mounted with > Indexed*UrlCodingStrategy, > as the parameters are ordered (0,1,2,...) with these strategies. otherwise, > how do you decide > which parameter is used for which wildcard? and since parameters are denoted > by name, the order > doesn't matter, also not where in the path the parameter is located (but > typically it will be after the mount path) > > # the parameter ordering is the same as we have it now, regardless where the > parameter is located. > mountpath: /blog/*/post > path for a request: /blog/gseitz/post/2008/ > "gseitz" ... 0th param > "2008" ... 1st param > > # there must be at least one "fixed" mount path fragment (again, same as we > have it now), > but it doesn't matter _where_ the fragment is positioned in the mount path. > so it's possible to mount a page like this: /*/profile > mountpaths like /* or /*/* etc. are not allowed (at least not for > urlstrategies that support wildcards > via an interface like IWildcardProcessingUrlCodingStrategy) > > # in case the actual parameter for the wildcard parameter is omitted, the > request isn't even > handed over to the specific urlcodingstrategy > > > i have a working implementation for the above mentioned use cases, but i > certainly wanted to get > some opinions whether we want to integrate this. so i appreciate any > feedback. > > cheers, > Gerolf >
