Janne --
I was expecting constructive -- rather than categorical -- comments
from you. I did not perceive that you had many positive suggestions,
and that disappoints me.
I will respond in detail later, but not today.
Andrew
On Jul 9, 2008, at 3:01 AM, Janne Jalkanen wrote:
I actually prefer using the '/' since it sideways fits into my
existing
URL schema. My schema:
baseURL collectionHierarchy [objectId] action ['?' parameters]
Janne's scheme (from what I understand):
baseURL [collectionHierarchy/objectId] action ['?' parameters]
Close, but no. The DefaultURLConstructor schema is
baseURL action [collectionHierarchy/objectId] ['?' parameters].
What I am just arguing that the schema that you want *requires*
code. Or mod_rewrite. Can't be done with Stripes automatically.
be resolvable, which in this system means an absolute URL. If
Stripes is
capable of parsing an arbitrary depth collection hierarchy (or
directory
structure, if that's what we're essentially mirroring), then that's
fine.
No, it cannot.
I really hope we don't have to use some ugly syntax for that. I don't
have a requirement for arbitrary depth at all, nor can I foresee
that.
It's just too ugly and complicated for most users. Wikis have been
flat
since their inception and I'm fine with them being flat.
The point is that you don't have to use them. However, for some
cases, the flat namespace is a problem (like the Weblog plugin -
currently we have to rely on naming conventions to identify pages,
and you know how much of a mess that becomes. Would be much nicer
to just embed them as subpages for the current page.)
It's really hard to imagine that annotations could be less flexible
than
code.
They are, since everything in them needs to be a static value. It
cannot be recomputed at runtime.
I don't see that as a barrier to adoption. And if we know we're
going to
using Stripes in 3.0 I can't see any reason not to *begin* to use
it now.
There is, since it requires a massive change to the internals of
JSPWiki (or else it won't be useful).
/Janne
