Jerome Velociter wrote: > Hello, > >> Hi, >> >> I had proposed to use the ^ character as attachment delimiter. >> Ex: wiki:Space.Page^attachment >> >> However I've just realized while implementing it that it's an "unwise" >> character in an URI >> (source: http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2396.txt) >> >> unwise = "{" | "}" | "|" | "\" | "^" | "[" | "]" | "`" >> >> Allowed punctuations characters are: >> >> mark = "-" | "_" | "." | "!" | "~" | "*" | "'" | "(" | ")" >> >> BTW the following are reserved: >> reserved = ";" | "/" | "?" | ":" | "@" | "&" | "=" | "+" | "$" | "," >> >> Note that we use ":" for wiki delimiter but that's okay since we're >> using an opaque URI and thus reserved chars, unreserved chars and >> escaped chars are authorized. >> >> I think it would be better to choose amongst one the valid chars for >> the attachment to prevent future problems. >> >> Of course this means we'll have to make that character forbidden in a >> page name. Actually we could also decide that it's character forbidden >> in an attachment (and use lastIndexOf() instead of indexOf() to >> separate the page name from the attachment name). Or we could double >> it once again... >> >> I propose we use the @ symbol since it's not a char used often in page >> names. >> >> For example: >> attach:wiki:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > looks good, +1
sounds pretty ok, +1 > >> This raises the discussion of the full FQN we'd like to have when we >> support nested spaces too. For example: >> >> (wiki name) "::" (space name) [ "." (space name)]* "::" (page name) >> ["@" (attachment name)]? >> >> Now what about referencing objects and properties using a URI too? Do >> we want that? What would be the use? Right now I don't see a use and >> using an API to access them seems fine to me. >> >> Alternative view >> ============ >> >> We could also only specify the attachment name in the uri and use link >> parameters to specify the document where it's located as in: >> >> [[image:my.png>>document="wiki:Space.Page"]] Would we want to pass other parameters than ones that can be directly copied in html attributes? >> >> This sounds reasonable to me too. I think the real question is whether >> we need a textual representation of an attachment FQN or not. > > Do we have use cases already for such FQN ? Annotations ? > > Jerome. > >> WDYT? >> >> Thanks >> -Vincent >> >> _______________________________________________ >> devs mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs >> > > > _______________________________________________ > devs mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs _______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
