Allen Gilliland wrote:
> Elias,
> 
> I am still playing around with the latest tagging code in the trunk, but
> so far everything looks great.  I have a few more small items that I
> think are worth doing, and one or two optional ones we can think about ...
> 
> 1. I think we should allow for configurable values for a couple things.
> 
>   - # of allowed tag intersections.  you hard coded 3, but i think this
> should be configurable.  this is enforced in WeblogXXXRequest.
>   - maximum length value returned from getPopularTags().  right now you
> just accept the value passed in, but i think we should do a simple check
> to make sure the value passed in doesn't exceed some configured max.
> this is enforced in WebsiteData and SiteModel getPopularTags() methods.
> 
> 2. You don't need a getTags() method in SiteModel, but it should be in
> FeedModel.  Since the SiteModel is stateless there is no need for that
> method, it's already available in the PageModel and you should add it to
> the FeedModel as well.
> 
> Those are the only ones I have so far which I think should be done.
> There are a couple more optional ones which may be worth doing as well,
> but aren't necessarily tied to tagging ...

I will do those.

> 
> 3. Enforce strict urls.  This is more of an overall approach type
> question to url handling, but right now we allow for opportunities where
> unsupported data is put into a url and instead of rejecting the url we
> simply ignore the parts we don't support.  This may not be the best idea
> depending on how you look at it.  Since technically we don't want people
> to try and do /weblog/tags/foo+bar?cat=MyCat then it makes some sense to
> reject those urls as 404 or possibly a 400 Bad Request.  Obviously this
> isn't really a problem, it's more of a question of best practice.

Correct. I believe that if it's a bad parameter is a bad request but if
it's in the path, then 404. I totally agree we shouldn't be ignoring
stuff and should be reporting it accordingly.

> 
> 4. Optionally enforce a max entries per page setting.  We had briefly
> talked about this during the 3.0 release, but it didn't end up getting
> done.  In any case, I think this is a good thing to be a site-wide
> configurable setting so that the admin can define the maximum number of
> entries to show on a page, and the default Roller value can be
> "unlimited".  On large scale sites like blogs.sun.com people make some
> rather silly decisions, like setting the entry display count to "9999",
> and so enforcing a max value seems quite reasonable to me.  I had
> planned to do this for 3.0, but it slipped by me, so I can take this as
> an item for 3.1.

No problem. Is it a small change?

> 
> -- Allen
> 
> 
> Elias Torres wrote:
>> Hi Guys,
>>
>> I consider tagging to be code-complete, but definitely not bug-free. Now
>> I'll start working with DB2 to make sure we are compatible in the SQL
>> queries/structure and keep on testing. Please review/test it to make
>> sure I'm not missing anything really important.
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>> -Elias
> 

Reply via email to