Hi Jukka, > On Nov 20, 2007 3:26 PM, Bertrand Delacretaz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > 1. The URI is split in four parts (resource path, selectors, > > extension, suffix), where "resource path" is the longest part of the > > request path that matches a Node in the repository i think, that it is true that the difference between selectors and the extension is arbitrary, and i see its value mostly for explanatory purposes. one will end up being a filename, the other will be a directory name.
> I would only split the URI (path) to two parts, the resource path and > anything that comes after that. Basically, the resolver would start > with a context node and a URI path (without any leading parts like the > webapp or servlet path removed) and walk down the node hierarchy using > segments of the given URI path until no matching node is found. The > result of this resolution is a new context node and the remaining > unresolved part of the URI path. from an implementation standpoint i think thats a good thing to do. from a users perspective i think there is value in guiding how to use the flexibility with the "unresolved parts" of the url. so one might say that this is purely a "best practices discussion", and thats where the four parts come in handy. > > 4. If no Servlet is found, the ScriptResolver looks for a script, > > building its path as follows: > > /sling/scripts/RT/ME.EXT > I would remove this part from the resolution process within the Sling > framework, and leave it up to a default servlet like > SlingScriptServlet, that would construct the /RT/ME.EXT path using the > remaining path info from step 1 above and recursively call the > resolution process using /sling/scripts as the context to find an > appropriate script node. good question. I have to say that I consider leaving out the right options, buttons and extension points the true art of building good software. Personally, I have not run into a situation where this way of resolving to scripts was an issue, so I see little value in making this extensible. > (I'd still like to use slashes > as separators instead of dots, but that's a minor concern) Just to make sure, does that mean that we would have something like: /mypage/html /mypage/edit/html /mypage/headimage/png instead of /mypage.html /mypage.edit.html /mypage.headimage.png regards, david
