Sylvain Hellegouarch wrote: > Luke Arno wrote: >> I see that Ian has marked the proposed routing args >> convention as accepted. I have updated selector and >> now consider it a stable feature so feel free to use it. >> >> http://wsgi.org/wsgi/Specifications/routing_args >> https://lukearno.com/projects/selector/ >> > > Hello there, > > Sorry for being so late into the discussion. I must say I like that > proposal and I completely sedond it. Except for one small point, the > spec says: > > "The values in routing_args need not be strings (except for the keys of > named_args). For instance, a dispatcher is allowed to parse > /archive/2005/10/01 into ((), {'date': datetime.date(2005, 10, 1)})." > > This could be an issue for deployment if we consider that applications > or other middleware will not be able to know what a middleware that > implements this proposal has decided to do, map the values or not. > > Say I have the value '00001' in my URI, I don't want the dispatcher to > assume it's an int and maps it to '1'. Maybe this value is an identifier > for me and I need the complete value. There is a loss of information.
My assumption was that, while non-strings are allowed, it would be something the dispatcher would handle when asked to do so explicitly. That is, a dispatcher shouldn't speculatively coerce values to integers or dates. Every dispatcher has some kind of setup/configure routine, which is where type coercions are likely to go. If this doesn't seem clear from the spec, this could be noted. -- Ian Bicking | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://blog.ianbicking.org _______________________________________________ Web-SIG mailing list Web-SIG@python.org Web SIG: http://www.python.org/sigs/web-sig Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/web-sig/archive%40mail-archive.com
