[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TAP5-612?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
 ]

Robert Zeigler reassigned TAP5-612:
-----------------------------------

    Assignee: Robert Zeigler

> URLRewriting should distinguish between incoming and outgoing requests
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: TAP5-612
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TAP5-612
>             Project: Tapestry 5
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: tapestry-core
>    Affects Versions: 5.1.0.2
>            Reporter: Robert Zeigler
>            Assignee: Robert Zeigler
>
> Currently, the new URLRewriting support uses a single method on the set of 
> rewrite rules called "process".
> This method is called both for transforming incoming request urls and for 
> rewriting "outbound" links.  Generally, however, urls from incoming requests 
> are going to be translated into tapestry-aware urls and urls for links will 
> be mapped from tapestry-aware urls to some external form.  To facilitate the 
> "in" vs. "out" mapping, URL Rewriting should provide a mechanism to 
> distinguish between rewriting incoming urls vs. rewriting links. 
> Three possible ways of doing that are:
>   1) have a separate service for incoming vs. outgoing rewriting
>   2) Alter the URLRewriterRule API to change from the single "process" method 
> to two methods: "processIncoming" and "processOutgoing" (or something along 
> those lines)
>   3) Alter URLRewriterRule API to pass an additional "RewriteContext" method 
> parameter.  The context would include (for now) a single method "boolean 
> isIncoming" or perhaps "boolean isOutgoing". (Alternatively, we could change 
> the method signature to just provide a boolean "isOutgoing" parameter; but 
> providing the RewriteContext would allow the API to evolve better in the 
> future should we find that additional context information is useful).
> Currently leaning towards #2.  The positive point in #3 could be handled in 
> the future by the introduction of a per-thread "helper" service, 
> RewriteContext or some such, that could be injected directly into the rewrite 
> rules. 

-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.

Reply via email to