Re: [Webware-discuss] Application.py limitations

2001-11-25 Thread Ian Bicking
On Sun, 2001-11-25 at 17:16, Chuck Esterbrook wrote: > > There does seem to be a concensus that URL mapping needs to be > > generalized, to enable exactly the things you are thinking of (and other > > stuff -- there's a list of ideas on the Wiki). None of this is > > implemented, though. > > I t

Re: [Webware-discuss] Application.py limitations

2001-11-25 Thread Chuck Esterbrook
On Thursday 15 November 2001 04:17 pm, Ian Bicking wrote: > On Thu, 2001-11-15 at 17:21, Sascha Matzke wrote: > > My suggestion is that we move the file system stuff were > > it (IMO) belongs - into the ServletFactories that handle > > physical files. > > There does seem to be a concensus that URL

Re: [Webware-discuss] Application.py limitations

2001-11-16 Thread Sascha Matzke
Hi, Ian Bicking wrote: > Right, but that leaves the extension in the URL, which is something > Webware intentionally does not do. And, like I said, it makes the > framework easier -- but I still think it's worth it not to use them. Ok... I think there are two kinds of URLs. Those which are vie

Re: [Webware-discuss] Application.py limitations

2001-11-16 Thread Tavis Rudd
On Friday 16 November 2001 10:19, Kendall Clark wrote: > I suspect, Ian, you were thinking of > > http://www.w3.org/Provider/Style/URI Great article! I've added it to the wiki http://webware.colorstudy.net/twiki/bin/view/Webware/DirectoryStructure > PS--Anyone seen Cofax(.org)? I'm dreaming o

Re: [Webware-discuss] Application.py limitations

2001-11-16 Thread Kendall Clark
> "ian" == Ian Bicking <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: ian> Tim Berners-Lee wrote a good document about URL design, which I ian> can't find at the moment. It talks about why extensions aren't ian> a good idea for the URL. If someone remembers this and has a ian> link, I'd be curious to

Re: [Webware-discuss] Application.py limitations

2001-11-15 Thread Ian Bicking
On Thu, 2001-11-15 at 18:37, Sascha Matzke wrote: > > As far as the fix, you can't really do this entirely in the > > ServletFactory, because you don't know which kind of ServletFactory to > > call until you've parsed the URL to find what name matches to what > > resource (which may or may not be

Re: [Webware-discuss] Application.py limitations

2001-11-15 Thread Sascha Matzke
Hi, Ian Bicking wrote: > As far as the fix, you can't really do this entirely in the > ServletFactory, because you don't know which kind of ServletFactory to > call until you've parsed the URL to find what name matches to what > resource (which may or may not be a file). Extensions in the URL,

Re: [Webware-discuss] Application.py limitations

2001-11-15 Thread Ian Bicking
On Thu, 2001-11-15 at 17:21, Sascha Matzke wrote: > My suggestion is that we move the file system stuff were > it (IMO) belongs - into the ServletFactories that handle > physical files. There does seem to be a concensus that URL mapping needs to be generalized, to enable exactly the things you ar

Re: [Webware-discuss] Application.py limitations

2001-11-15 Thread Tavis Rudd
I agree with this. There are several methods in Application (and in a few other classes I think) that assume alot about the relationship between the URIs and 'targets'. At the moment, targets can be files in a particular 'context'. With the ideas for flexible URI-to-target mapping and multi-

[Webware-discuss] Application.py limitations

2001-11-15 Thread Sascha Matzke
Hi, as I worked my way through the sources of WebKit today I discovered something in Application.py what in my eyes seems to be a major limitation of the capabilities WebKit would be able to provide. In Application.dispatchRequest() is a check for the existence of a server-side match for the req