> The one thing that we'll need to watch out for is the case where we
> have to preserve a topic name that is otherwise invalid. This will
> bite us in the case of allowing users to edit "bad" 1.8 topics and
> also if we get fancy with error handling where we preserve the topic
> name for the user to allow them to fix it more interactively. I guess
> that we'll need to make the validation a "passive" occurrence where
> there is a IsValid property or something and still allow trash names
> to get set. This isn't as clean, but I think that back-compat will be
> easier this way.

Here are my initial thoughts: 

* I can't see any good reason not to allow any character except dot. I can
see a case for not allowing either slash as well. Everything else should be
legal, including non-ASCII characters. 
* I think validation should be "active" by default, not passive. An optional
constructor parameter on TopicName could suppress the validation. It's not
clear to me how hard it would be pull this off. At some point we are allowed
to break backward compatibility - maybe it would be enough to suppress
validation on a sitewide basis for sites that can't migrate, and then to
abandon support for nonvalidation in some future version. 



-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005.
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/
_______________________________________________
Flexwiki-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flexwiki-users

Reply via email to