I just want to show my root URL address whenever people browse into other pages of my site. How do I do this in dtml or python script or external method?? --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - Find what you need with new enhanced search. Learn more.
Allen Huang wrote:
I just want to show my root URL address whenever people browse into other pages of my site. How do I do this in dtml or python script or external method??
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Allen, You can use index_html as a "call dispatcher". Each ZPT, DTML, etc form's action should = "." or "index_html". Example: // ................................. EditForm // ................................. <head> <script type="text/css"> function Process() }{ document.form.action_type.value = "Process" document.form.submit() } function Cancels() }{ document.form.action_type.value = "Cancel" document.form.submit() } </head> <body> <h1>my big page</h1> .. <form action="index_html" method="post> <input type="hidden" name="caller" value="editform" <input type="hidden" name="action" value="" . . <input type="button" onClick="process();return false;" value="Process"> <input type="button" onClick="cancel();return false;" value="Cancel"> </form> # ------------------------------------- index.html (i use python for this) # ----------------------------------- request = context.REQUEST if caller == "editform": if action_type=="process" return context.Main(context,request) if caller == 'someotherform" return context..SomeOtherForm(context,request) etc In this way, you always get your apps root directory as the url. index_html handles all requests. David
Allen Huang wrote:
I just want to show my root URL address whenever people browse into other pages of my site. How do I do this in dtml or python script or external method??
If I understand what you're asking, there's only one "good" way to do that: place your content in an iframe (or regular frame). You might modify main_template to do this. The frame's contents could change, but not the URL (since the "container" page is still the same.) You can see this effect in the ZMI. It's vaguely possible that you could do this with Javascript, but I don't know how, if it's even possible. Both techniques are easily defeatable by users. But please note, this is very hostile web design. I would suggest you re-think your need for such a "feature". --jcc
On May 10, 2005, at 00:48, J Cameron Cooper wrote:
But please note, this is very hostile web design. I would suggest you re-think your need for such a "feature".
"Hostile" is an excellent word for that kind of behavior. It certainly breaks quite a few rules in the "user friendliness" book. So what exactly is the goal for following such a user-defeating technique? jens
Jens Vagelpohl wrote:
On May 10, 2005, at 00:48, J Cameron Cooper wrote:
But please note, this is very hostile web design. I would suggest you re-think your need for such a "feature".
"Hostile" is an excellent word for that kind of behavior. It certainly breaks quite a few rules in the "user friendliness" book.
So what exactly is the goal for following such a user-defeating technique?
jens
If I might disagree, keeping a stable URL is not, by itself, "user-defeating". For example, user's do not like browser history clutter with subfolders and objects - all from the same application. Also, we do not want a user to open browser history and click www.myApp.com/updateChartOfAccounts. Because that would be "out of context". Sure you can respond with an error message. But why should they see it in the first place? With a stable URL they just click www.myApp.com and they get the main page - every time. The question remains - is there an elegant solution to this. I think there is. Maybe 3 years ago Jim Penny wrote a message (I wish I could find it now!) regarding a web technique which I believe he referred to as the "stateless machine". I liked the idea and have used it ever since. The idea is to use index_html as a request dispatcher. index_html simply responds to page requests and pulls in zpt macros, dtml and python code displaying to screen. An example: index_html request = context.REQUEST if request[caller] == 'Budgeting': if request[action_type] == 'Process': context.SQL.updateBudget() context.ZPT.showUpdatePage(context,request) and the caller looks like ... Zpt module Budgeting .. <form name="budgeting" action="index_html"> <input type="hidden" name="caller" value="Budgeting"> <input type="hidden" name="action_type" value="" > <---- see with javascript <input type "button" name="process" value=" Process " onclick="Process()"> etc I believe that this technique is not only useful in the "stable" URL way, but it is very useful for larger applications - index_html becomes the "engine" driving the whole application. This centralizes a big chunk of application logic in one place. David
David H <bluepaul@earthlink.net> wrote:
If I might disagree, keeping a stable URL is not, by itself, "user-defeating". For example, user's do not like browser history clutter with subfolders and objects - all from the same application.
Speaking for myself, often I'm not looking for a website in my history but for a specific page. Often I remember the website, not the page. The history feature of the browser should be intelligent enough to allow grouping by website. That's not a server problem.
Also, we do not want a user to open browser history and click www.myApp.com/updateChartOfAccounts. Because that would be "out of context". Sure you can respond with an error message. But why should they see it in the first place?
They shouldn't, the application should be written in such a way that this is a POST, and it won't appear in the history.
With a stable URL they just click www.myApp.com and they get the main page - every time.
That's what bookmarks are for. You're trying to force your ideas of bookmarking and history management to the users.
The question remains - is there an elegant solution to this.
What you call "stable URL" everybody else calls "cloaking" or "jailing". It *is* hostile to the user. Florent -- Florent Guillaume, Nuxeo (Paris, France) CTO, Director of R&D +33 1 40 33 71 59 http://nuxeo.com fg@nuxeo.com
Florent Guillaume wrote:
David H <bluepaul@earthlink.net> wrote:
If I might disagree, keeping a stable URL is not, by itself, "user-defeating". For example, user's do not like browser history clutter with subfolders and objects - all from the same application.
www.myApp.com/updateChartOfAccounts. Because that would be "out of
context". Sure you can respond with an error message. But why should they see it in the first place?
They shouldn't, the application should be written in such a way that this is a POST, and it won't appear in the history.
POST conceals parameters not paths from history. And I only described a WAY to handle the problem.
With a stable URL they just click www.myApp.com and they get the main page - every time.
That's what bookmarks are for. You're trying to force your ideas of bookmarking and history management to the users.
I wish I could impose my ideas on users. I respond to specs. Yes, I will fight the good fight when a spec is silly. I've even turned down gigs because the client was stubborn and what they wanted would be a disaster. But URL "cloaking" is not silly to some clients and the pattern I described handles it nicely and has benefits well beyond maintaining a stable URL. Note: Sometimes I sense a "culture clash" between Advanced Zope developement guys, Web presentation guys and us lowly application developers that get the joy of accounting systems online.
The question remains - is there an elegant solution to this.
What you call "stable URL" everybody else calls "cloaking" or "jailing". It *is* hostile to the user.
Im curious, how is it "hostile" to a user? If there are superior patterns (for Business Apps) Im the first that wants to see them and this is a welcome discussion. :-) Thanks very much Florent, David
I wish I could impose my ideas on users. I respond to specs. Yes, I will fight the good fight when a spec is silly.
If this is coming from a spec, it's very silly, and a total waste of your time...
I've even turned down gigs because the client was stubborn and what they wanted would be a disaster.
So you turned this one down, right?
But URL "cloaking" is not silly to some clients and the pattern I described handles it nicely and has benefits well beyond maintaining a stable URL.
Oh? Do enlighten us... ;-)
Note: Sometimes I sense a "culture clash" between Advanced Zope developement guys,
"people with brains"
Web presentation guys
"people with too little brain to understand or care what usability really means" ;-)
and us lowly application developers that get the joy of accounting systems online.
"people who should know better but are too timid to speak" *grinz*
Im curious, how is it "hostile" to a user?
It's grim to debug, and will confuse your users even more when it goes wrong. "but the thingy in the box is still the same, why is it not working"
If there are superior patterns (for Business Apps) Im the first that wants to see them and this is a welcome discussion. :-)
There are many, but that's beyond the scope of this list... cheers, Chris -- Simplistix - Content Management, Zope & Python Consulting - http://www.simplistix.co.uk
Chris Withers wrote:
I wish I could impose my ideas on users. I respond to specs. Yes, I will fight the good fight when a spec is silly.
If this is coming from a spec, it's very silly, and a total waste of your time...
I've even turned down gigs because the client was stubborn and what they wanted would be a disaster.
So you turned this one down, right?
But URL "cloaking" is not silly to some clients and the pattern I described handles it nicely and has benefits well beyond maintaining a stable URL.
Oh? Do enlighten us... ;-)
Note: Sometimes I sense a "culture clash" between Advanced Zope developement guys,
"people with brains"
Web presentation guys
"people with too little brain to understand or care what usability really means" ;-)
and us lowly application developers that get the joy of accounting systems online.
"people who should know better but are too timid to speak" *grinz*
Im curious, how is it "hostile" to a user?
It's grim to debug, and will confuse your users even more when it goes wrong. "but the thingy in the box is still the same, why is it not working"
If there are superior patterns (for Business Apps) Im the first that wants to see them and this is a welcome discussion. :-)
There are many, but that's beyond the scope of this list...
cheers,
Chris
Hi Chris, Yeah I really should put a representative model online. When I do I'll invite a new wave of assaults but its all for the good. 8-) Because if people show me a better way for the kinds of apps I develope (accounting) then that would be great. On the otherhand you may be surprised at what the "stateless" machine concept can accomplish - and how elegant it is. Thanks, David ps - your SimpleUserFolder Rocks!
Chris, I didn't address any of the points you made, but I've decided to address two: (1) When I asked what was inherently defective about a "stable URL" you answered: a) "It's grim to debug" Chris, do you really depend on their users to report URLS to support when things go wrong? I use exceptions, logs and auto-emailing of exceptions "as a work around" - what was I thinking! :-) Then you added b) (stable url will ...) "confuse your users even more when it goes wrong. "but the thingy in the box is still the same, why is it not working" Chris, this may come as a shock to you, but my users say something incomprehensible like "Purchase Order Edit" "is not working" or COA Maintenance needs A, B and C. Somehow I know what they are talking about - and so do they. (2) Then, I said "If there are superior patterns (for Business Apps) Im the first that wants to see them and this is a welcome discussion" And you asserted "... there are *many* but that are beyond the scope of this list" Simple disagreement! I feel its a neglected subject and should be on this list. OK maybe on Sundays? All best, David
David H wrote:
a) "It's grim to debug" Chris, do you really depend on their users to report URLS to support when things go wrong? I use exceptions, logs and auto-emailing of exceptions "as a work around" - what was I thinking! :-)
Yes, well, I wrote MailingLogger 5 years ago, so I think I have a bit of experience with this... Now, I want as much context as possible from any error report. By having "one url", which is a fake nasty hack anyway, you cut off one avenue of context for feedback...
b) (stable url will ...) "confuse your users even more when it goes wrong. "but the thingy in the box is still the same, why is it not working" Chris, this may come as a shock to you, but my users say something incomprehensible like "Purchase Order Edit" "is not working" or COA Maintenance needs A, B and C.
Are you seriously telling me this helps you out more than if you ask a user to paste the URL into the "url" box in your issue tracker and they put: http://www.example.com/purchaseorders/0027/edit?approved=1 rather than: http://www.example.com/ Being able to map a URL directly to an object traversal and method is one of the core ideas behind Zope, you're deliberately blowing this away...
Somehow I know what they are talking about - and so do they.
Yes, well, I prefer specific information rather than "somehow" ;-)
(2) Then, I said "If there are superior patterns (for Business Apps) Im the first that wants to see them and this is a welcome discussion"
And you asserted "... there are *many* but that are beyond the scope of this list"
Simple disagreement! I feel its a neglected subject and should be on this list.
Not on this list, there are plenty of patterns lists, books, etc... cheers, Chris -- Simplistix - Content Management, Zope & Python Consulting - http://www.simplistix.co.uk
Dne úterý, 10. května 2005 00:48 J Cameron Cooper <zope-l@jcameroncooper.com> napsal(a):
Allen Huang wrote:
I just want to show my root URL address whenever people browse into other pages of my site. How do I do this in dtml or python script or external method??
If I understand what you're asking, there's only one "good" way to do that: place your content in an iframe (or regular frame). You might modify main_template to do this. The frame's contents could change, but not the URL (since the "container" page is still the same.) You can see this effect in the ZMI.
any other technique than frameset in this cause will make you big troubles in SEO marketing magic. If you will use one folder for one document, you will make search engines very happy and your boss will be later happy too. -- Jaroslav Lukesh ----------------------------------------------------------- This e-mail can not contain any viruses because I use Linux
participants (7)
-
Allen Huang -
Chris Withers -
David H -
Florent Guillaume -
J Cameron Cooper -
Jaroslav Lukesh -
Jens Vagelpohl