[Zope-CMF] CSS and .js files: where to put 'em?
Fri, 14 Feb 2003 11:57:02 -0500
Greg Ward wrote:
> <link rel="Stylesheet" type="text/css" href="styles">
> Yuck. Is there a good way to keep the .css extension there? I like
> meaningful filenames. (I found a bad way: name the file
> "styles.css.css" in the filesystem. Yuck, yuck, and double-yuck.)
I can't claim it's much cleaner, but one way to do this is to add a
"styles.css.properties" file with the following:
It's not as bad as doubling the extension.
AdaptableStorage, FWIW, has had to face this same issue. This time I
guessed that it's not a good policy to strip extensions implicitly. So
now AdaptableStorage allows you to strip extensions, but you have to do
it explicitly. I like the way it turned out.
> Another source of yuckiness: this doesn't play nice with caches.
> Documents in every folder of the site will reference "styles", so the
> browser will be stuck downloading the same CSS file using many different
> URLs, and will therefore be unable to cache it. That doesn't bother me
> nearly as much as the cache-unfriendliness of putting images in the
> skin, but it's still not good.
For images, here's the way I solve the caching problem:
<img src="some_image" tal:replace="here/some_image" />
The tag generated by the image object refers to the canonical URL, so
caching works as intended, and as a bonus, the height, width, alt, and
title attributes get included. The solution for stylesheets isn't quite
<link rel="Stylesheet" type="text/css" href="styles.css"
tal:attributes="href here/styles.css/absolute_url" />
> skin? The obvious benefit is that then they're in the filesystem, where
> all source code belongs. But presumably I'll have the same problems as
> with .css files. So should they be in a Zope folder instead (as they
> currently are)? Anyone have strong opinions one way or the other?
I would put the JS files in the skin, but again, I would make sure the
href points to the canonical URL using tal:attributes.