Chris Withers wrote: > Philipp von Weitershausen wrote: >>> Failing to find a clear explanation, I only see a ways for Zope3-based >>> sites to: >>> >>> 1. Be toyed with by the user. >> >> How so? > > "ooo look, pretty shiny things in urls, I wonder what they mean"
Right. What's the problem though? You can toy with Zope 2 URLs as well. If the app is properly built, it won't be a problem. If it is, your app is vulnerable against URL spoofing and the problem certainly won't lie with @ and +. >>> 2. Fall out of search engines. >> >> Why? > > Search engines don't particularly like weird characters in urls. @ and + are not "weird" characters in URLs. They're allowed by the spec and I'd be surprised if they actually are a problem. So far, this is all hand-waving. >>> 4. Fail the over-the-phone test of URl's... >> >> Can you spell @@ or ++ over the phone? I can. > > Yeah, but you're one of the leading Zope developers in the world. > Try explaining it to someone with an IQ of 50 who just about knows what > a / (no, the *other* slash) and a . (yeah, the one without the curly bit > on the bottom of it) are ;-) Then you'd have a problem of spelling ANY url or email address to those people. Again, hand-waving. >> Plus, no one says ++ and >> @@ have to occur in a public view of Zope 3 site. Go to >> http://worldcookery.com. You won't see much of @@ or ++. > > Good, I'd love to know how to produce a whole Zope 3 app without these > weird appendages... The same way you produce a Zope 2 app: make sure view names and content names don't clash and you're all set. Philipp _______________________________________________ Zope3-users mailing list Zope3firstname.lastname@example.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope3-users