On Apr 9, 2010, at 6:16 AM, DenesL wrote: > I like the semicolon idea. > But doesn't it imply changing web2py, anywhere where args and vars are > used, like the URL function?.
The URL function, yes, because it's basically the rewrite-out handler. Nobody else should care, because the fields have already been split, unless an application is using the original URL. WRT handling missing defaults from a URL (a/c/f), I realized the other day that it's best to look at it starting with the routes-out side, URL(), and making the routes-in side complement it. I think that's conceptually simpler than the implied routes.py approach of managing routes-in and then figuring out the routes-out complement. Maybe that's just me... > > > On Apr 8, 2:22 pm, mdipierro <mdipie...@cs.depaul.edu> wrote: >> I think if ; is present it be used by default to delimit the args >> since there cannot be confusion there >> >> /a/c/f.ext;a0/a1/a2 >> /a/c/f/a0/a1/a2.ext >> >> should be parsed in the same way. >> >> routes_in and routes_out should not be affected since they only >> rewrite the URL before web2py interprets it. >> >> On Apr 8, 12:43 pm, Thadeus Burgess <thade...@thadeusb.com> wrote: >> >>> I just want it to be able to routes_in on both with ; and without ;. >> >>> This is because my blog is indexed on google, and I want my old links >>> to still work If I moved over to the ; method. >> >>> -Thadeus >> >>> On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 11:56 AM, Jonathan Lundell <jlund...@pobox.com> >>> wrote: >>>> On Apr 8, 2010, at 9:37 AM, Thadeus Burgess wrote: >> >>>>> How will we be able to configure to use one or the other? >> >>>> I'm thinking an alternative variable in routes.py. >> >>>> Also, there would be (I think) a provision for application-specific >>>> routes.py files, so once the application is resolved at the top level, the >>>> application-specific parsing could either be in the global routes.py (as >>>> now) or the app-specific version. >> >>>>> Will it be able to do "Both" at the same time (for routes_in of >>>>> course). I ask since certain web2py sites are scanned in google, you >>>>> don't want the old links to dis-appear. >> >>>> Perhaps, but with some restrictions, since using / as the args separator >>>> leads to ambiguities that don't exist with ;. >> >>>> I'd like to be able to use standard Python libraries to do the main >>>> parsing work. Seehttp://docs.python.org/library/urlparse.html >> >>>> BTW, RFC2396 actually allows a ;-separated parameter on each component of >>>> the path; you could >>>> havehttp://domain.com/app;arg1/ctlr;arg2/function;arg3?query_string. I >>>> don't see a use for that in the web2py architecture, though. >> >>>>> -Thadeus >> >>>>> On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 11:30 AM, mdipierro <mdipie...@cs.depaul.edu> >>>>> wrote: >>>>>> +1 >> >>>>>> On Apr 8, 11:25 am, Jonathan Lundell <jlund...@pobox.com> wrote: >>>>>>> (Context: I've been working on URL parsing.) >> >>>>>>> One of the difficulties that parsing web2py URLs presents is that the >>>>>>> boundary between /a/c/f and args isn't explicit, along with the fact >>>>>>> that pieces of /a/c/f can be implied (in particular when routes.py is >>>>>>> being used). >> >>>>>>> RFC2396 (1998) introduced (or rather extended) the notion of >>>>>>> 'parameters', taking advantage of the fact that ';' is reserved. So the >>>>>>> RFC2396 approach is to write: /a/c/f;parameters?query_string, or in >>>>>>> web2py terms /a/c/f;args?vars. >> >>>>>>> That is, the boundary between /a/c/f and args is marked with a >>>>>>> semi-colon instead of a slash. Args can of course be further divided >>>>>>> however one likes; vars is subdivided with '&'. >> >>>>>>> What I'm working on is an alternative to (or rather extension to) the >>>>>>> routes.py logic that is capable of supporting arbitrary encoding where >>>>>>> appropriate (especially in args and vars) and that does not rely on >>>>>>> regexes to do the work. The present scheme would remain in place. >> >>>>>>> Which brings me to my question: I'd like to use the ';' convention to >>>>>>> separate /a/c/f from args in this new regime. Does anyone have any >>>>>>> strong feelings about it one way or the other? >> >>>>>>> (One last thing: the architecture would be somewhat modular, so that >>>>>>> besides the current mechanism and the one I'm describing, it would be >>>>>>> fairly straightforward to introduce new ones.) >> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>>>> Groups "web2py-users" group. >>>>>> To post to this group, send email to web...@googlegroups.com. >>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >>>>>> web2py+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >>>>>> For more options, visit this group >>>>>> athttp://groups.google.com/group/web2py?hl=en. >> >>>>> -- >>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >>>>> "web2py-users" group. >>>>> To post to this group, send email to web...@googlegroups.com. >>>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >>>>> web2py+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >>>>> For more options, visit this group >>>>> athttp://groups.google.com/group/web2py?hl=en. >> >>>> -- >>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >>>> "web2py-users" group. >>>> To post to this group, send email to web...@googlegroups.com. >>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >>>> web2py+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >>>> For more options, visit this group >>>> athttp://groups.google.com/group/web2py?hl=en. > > > -- > To unsubscribe, reply using "remove me" as the subject.
