> > Maybe. The action name implies the nature of the ID. And you have to > validate/convert the ID anyway, so 'id' is not necessarily the same as > 'acct' or 'name'. Action methods by definition take routing variables > as-is, so ``.get_byacct(self, id)`` is not necessarily bad. You > should arguably have a separate set of business methods in the model > that take the real identifiers, to separate the business logic from > the HTTP UI (which is what the actions are). > > -- > Mike Orr <[email protected]>
That's all fine until you want to nest resources, and then you're forced to rename at least one of the id's (conventionally the parent's - at least in Rails) anyway. Why not use meaningful names throughout? As the author of described_routes I'm interested in machine readable representations of resource structure so I care more than most about consistency, but what argument is there in favour of "id" other than it requires no thought on the part of the developer? Regards, Mike [email protected] http://positiveincline.com http://twitter.com/asplake -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "pylons-discuss" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/pylons-discuss?hl=en.
