On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 1:40 PM, Wyatt Baldwin <[email protected]> wrote: > On Nov 24, 11:39 am, Mike Orr <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> [...] >> >> That would be great. The data structures in Mapper and Route are >> rather opaque and underdocumented though. We're considering a more >> transparent structure for a future version of Routes. > > Sign me up for that, at least as an interested party. I'm responsible > for the current `parent_resource` business, and I've always felt that > it was somewhat of a hack, and it only works for a limited set of use > cases. > > I've had some ideas about the resource side of things, like creating a > Resource class with a parent attribute, etc (though I'm not saying > that's necessarily the best approach). I wish that I could take more > up front initiative on this, but I can at least offer some assistance > once things get rolling.
The code looks like it's still on knowledgetap. https://www.knowledgetap.com/hg/routes2-dev This is the basic data structure, but it hasn't been touched for 2 years, and in the meantime some of its features have been implemented in Routes differently. I plan to make a ``map.resource2()`` method that implements view/add/modify/delete only with GET/POST, and using the same URL and method for the form and action. This would not be friendly to non-human user agents that expect REST, but not that many applications will ever be used by non-human agents. I would also have add/modify/delete flags to tell whether these operations should be implemented. Some resources are never added or never deleted over the web. -- Mike Orr <[email protected]> -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "pylons-discuss" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/pylons-discuss?hl=en.
