[Zope3-dev] URLs & Paths

[Chris Withers]

Jim Fulton wrote:
> 
> > *shrugs* I was thinking this is gonna apply to paths in ZPT and the like as
> > well?
> 
> Good question. I think that the rules used will vary somewhat depending
> on context.

I may just be paranoid but that smells like the potential for Magick and
ickyness...

> My inclination is that in a well designed system, browser
> URLs will only point (possibly indirectly) at (methods of) presentation
> components.

Yup, fair enough, but, certainly by default, there should be a consistent use of
path-type-things throughout Zope...

> URL. This is an area that needs more exploration. Our current thinking is that
> there are lower-level traversal interfaces that would be used by ZPT and
> other software.  It's not clear whether the lower-level traversal APIs
> will also support namespace control.

I think they should behave in hte same way as URL traversal, with namespace
control. At this level, I think ';' is a perfectly good idea and makes life a
_lot_ easier. (the same benefits of being able to say you want the attribute
rather than the item apply...)

> > > If you use implicit acquisition. I expect implicit
> > > acquisition to fade from usage. Acquisition will still
> > > be important, but will be more explicit, more predictable, and
> > > ultimately, more useful.

Just a further thought here, is it documented anywhere how you'd choose between
implicit and explicit acquisition?

> >
> > Indeed, if this lookup is easily configurable, all you have to do is drop
> > acquisition from the list and you're left with explicit acquisition ;-)
> 
> Assuming that you can spell it. The spelling would involve semi-colons.

:-)

> > I reckon for containers, you'll usually only get the one 'view' mode, and that's
> > where nice URLs are important. For 'edit' modes, I can live with the ; 'cos
> > accessing items is gonna be a lot mroe common than editing the container,
> > wouldn't you say?
> 
> Yup, except that for some containers, I can imagine lots of "view" modes:
> 
> - normal/default view
> 
> - summary
> 
> - browse
> 
> - search
> 
> - ... other application views

Ah, but those are application choices, and if you choose to do that at the
application level, then you have to put up with ; so the choice is yours.

On the topic of apps, I presume the choice of URL Traversal 'feature'(word still
sticks in the throat, sorry) will be made at the application level?

> Absolutely. See IComponentArchitecture:
> 
>   pres = getPresentation(ob, name, type)
> 
> where 'type' is a presentation type, expressed as an interface.
> You would pass different types for browsers, FTP, xml-rpc, wxwindows
> etc.

Cool :-)

> > > I'm going to write a separate proposal on this.
> > > Stay tuned.
> >
> > Cool :-) I really hope those Fishbowl notification tools show up soon or I'm
> > gonna miss it :-S
> 
> I'll announce the proposal to this list.

even better :-)

cheers,

Chris