[Zope3-dev] spelling of namespace signifiers

[Shane Hathaway]

Steve Alexander wrote:
> Casey Duncan wrote:
> 
>>
>> Just from a simple complication analysis of the above,
>> container/view--bar.html looks like a pretty viable option
> 
> 
> I agree. +1 from me.
> 
> Earlier in this thread, Guido said he prefered that too.
> 
> In an email conversation I had with Jim today, he mentioned a preference 
> for this spelling.
> 
> 
> Are there any compelling objections to container/view--somename.html ?
> 
> If not, I'll consider this to be the way forward, and make this change 
> on the Zope3InWonderland branch.

I'll express my interpretation of the above in Python:

parts = traversed_name.split('--', 1)
if len(parts) == 2:
     namespace, name = parts
else:
     namespace, name = 'content', traversed_name

Is that your interpretation?  Unfortunately, "--" can appear in lots of 
valid filenames, especially since it's the standard ASCII representation 
of long hyphens.

How about "container/--view-somename.html"?  Then it almost resembles a 
command-line option. ;-)

Still, I'm a bit leery of the namespace appearing in the final part of 
the path.  Here are my thoughts:

1) Our story is that the namespace qualifier isn't necessary for 
non-containerish objects, and necessary for containerish objects.

2) It follows that relative links between views of containerish objects 
will take a different form than relative links between views of 
non-containerish objects.

3) Therefore views intended for non-containerish objects can't be used 
on containerish objects.  But views intended for containerish objects 
can be used anywhere.

4) Wanting to reach a broader audience, Zope 3 developers will tend to 
always use namespace qualifiers.

"container;views/somename.html" avoids this.  But like Jim said, it 
makes it a little harder to switch namespaces.  How often will we want 
to switch namespaces?

Shane