[Zope3-dev] spelling of namespace signifiers

[Chris Withers]

Steve Alexander wrote:
> 
> Otherwise URL parsers in browsers get confused and think that "view" is
> a URL scheme.

*blerch*

> > This problem sux, can't we ignore it an pretend it's gone away? ;-)
> >
> > My own favourite, of course, is still:
> >
> > http://server.tld/folder/container.html
> >
> > ...of course. Can someone point out to me where this falls down?
> 
> Is "container.html" content, or is it a view?

container is the 'content', html is the 'view' ;-)

> If it is a view, are you willing to ensure that you won't have any
> content ever called "container.html" ?

Yup. I'd be quite comfortable with outlawing '.' in the _id_ of objects,
provided I can use .pdf to get a pdf view, .html to get a html view, etc...

> You can arrange for a particular container to have a policy that removes
> or deals with the ambiguity. However, in other cases, there needs to be
> a way of explicitly signifying whether you're talking about content, or
> a view.

don't follow...

> There's also the issue of other namespaces, such as the "etc" namespace
> for getting to services.

...indeed. For those weirdities (directly traversing to a service through a URL,
does that happen often?) I could live with:

http://server.tld/folder/container/etc::my_service

cheers,

Chris