Sven Fischer wrote:
I think it's a good thing for organizing the image elements of webpages, such that the site can start off with stock templates, and subsections can be progressively modified without re-coding the DTML (e.g. by graphic non-programmer types), by (e.g.) putting same-named .gif's in subdirectories.... sort of like, inheritance for .gif's. But... probably would be better to have a special foldertype to make that clear.
i agree, some type of generic folder wich would maybe stick to the top or bottom of the object list which would inherit from its parent too and would contain all generic stuff which is for the moment clurttering the root folder.
lets say i have this
folder1 / images folder1 / folder2 / images
i'd like to call the images always as "images/xxx.gif" whether i'm in folder1 or folder2
that would greatly clean the code imho,
Sorry, but if you're overriding same named graphics whose URL will appear to be identical, the browser cache will start playing hob with your site design. If you call all images with a relative URL, then even images that are acquired in this way will be reloaded, even though the browser has it already, since it'll be accessing the same image via a different URL. HTH, Michael Bernstein.