"Leslie P. Polzer" <[email protected]> writes:

>> The problem is that after you log in, the login widget gets replaced
>> with a navigation widget in an AJAX request. Then weblocks tries to
>> render the dirty widgets, which include the navigation widget. However,
>> the navigation widget does not know what its base-uri is, because it was
>> never accessed with an URI before. It suddenly got dropped in and tree
>> shakedown wasn't performed.
>>
>> I don't know what the correct solution is here. It is not something I
>> expected when I wrote the new navigation code. I'll keep thinking, in
>> the meantime any suggestions are welcome.
>
> I haven't investigated this deeply but have two mutually
> exclusive proposals:
>
>   1) make navigation (or was it selector here?) more resilient
>      by detecting a missing base uri. In this case the base URI
>      and the remaining tokens should be inferred from the parent
>      trail of dispatchers and the children set appropriately.
>
>      I'm not sure how well this would work outside of the theory
>      domain.
>
>   2) perform an explicit tree reconfiguration after the insert
>      (SETF WIDGET-CHILDREN) of a child of type dispatcher has
>      been detected.

Both solutions are too complex for my taste -- I'd rather look harder
for a simpler way out.

How about getting rid of the base-uri slot altogether? That way,
navigation would render relative URLs, code would be simpler, and would
work better.

The only other use for base-uri is code that redirects to the first pane
if no default pane was provided. I do not think we can redirect to a
relative URL, but I don't see a big need for this functionality. And
perhaps someone can think of a solution not involving base-uri here?

--J.

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"weblocks" 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/weblocks?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to