anders pearson wrote: > > one general purpose slugification routine may not be the best solution > though. some applications will have specific requirements. i've worked > with the journalism school here and they sometimes require a slug to be > in a specific format like 'authorlastname-oneworddescriptionofstory'. > other times autogenerated ones would be ok. > > one other bit of advice is to prefer '-' over '_'. both are about > equally readable but search engines are smarter about '-'. if you have > /foo-bar/ in the url of a page, google will index it and relate 'foo' > and 'bar' to the page but if it's /foo_bar/, it doesn't recognize the > underscore as a word seperator so it will relate it to 'foo_bar'. >
Hi Anders, I agree that a generic slug field would not fit all situations, I also think that a simple generic slug field with consistent rules might be a simple and convenient addition to TG. Since they are also not hard to write, then for those that have special needs, they can just whip one up themselves. On the other hand, I don't think it would be too hard to tell the slug field to slug a list of other columns instead of just one. Also a custom s regexp could be provided to change the rules. This might make it more useful for special needs. But the default should be very simple. If I get a chance, I will try to work on this. I generally don't have time to contribute must to projects, but this may be something that I can put a bit of time into. Good thinking about generalizing it more. Thanks, Krys
