Hi, On Nov 19, 2007 11:10 PM, Roy T. Fielding <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Nov 19, 2007, at 11:57 AM, Jukka Zitting wrote: > > Though, on a tangent, I'm wondering if we could achieve the same use > > cases with just the existing URL-to-JCR-path mapping. [...] > > The disadvantage is that it makes a mess of hierarchical access control > and relative links. Very bad.
We could also do something like .../path/to/document/pdf (or even ../path/to/document?format=pdf though that's a bit ugly and requires special case code) to make relative links easier. Access controls shouldn't be a concern as long as they're embedded within the underlying repository. My main concern is that we are currently splitting the URIs four ways (resource path, selectors, extension, suffix) when I think we could do just as well with two parts (resource path, suffix). This would IMHO make the URI mapping much more straightforward and flexible, at the price of moving part of the mapping code from the Sling framework itself to the servlet components deployed in Sling. BR, Jukka Zitting
