[Zope-dev] Re: Bug in AbsoluteURL Adapter

[Philipp von Weitershausen]

On 28 Nov 2007, at 12:54 , Daniel Havlik wrote:
> Am 28.11.2007 um 12:01 schrieb Philipp von Weitershausen:
>>> The problem we tried to solve was: We have a structure of Plone  
>>> content objects. We wanted to access a particular one in a view  
>>> which can be called anywhere. Therefore we registered this content  
>>> object as an utility. It turned out, that this utility does not  
>>> have a request after fetching it in our view with getUtility().  
>>> The request is needed to get an absolute URL of our content object.
>>
>> This is what I don't understand: why should content objects have  
>> access to the request? I understand that the request is needed in  
>> order to compute the absolute URL, but the IAbsoluteURL adapter is  
>> a *multi*-adapter for (context, request). So it will always receive  
>> the request explicitly in its constructor. This pattern is the  
>> foundation of separating content from presentation: the content  
>> object is request-unaware, the adapters and views around it are  
>> request-aware.
>
> Exactly, thats why we thought this may be a bug. The __str__ method  
> of Five's AbsoluteURL adapter does not make use of the request the  
> adapter gets in its constructor, it just calls the zope2-ish  
> absolute_url() method on the context. (Which itself relies on the  
> REQUEST attribute of the object to convert the path to an URL)

I see what you mean now. In that case I agree that it would be  
"cleaner" to use the adapter's request, *IF*  
request.physicalPathToURL(obj.getPhysicalPath()) will always yield the  
same as obj.absolute_url(), especially regarding virtual hosting, etc  
(if we don't have tests for that yet, creating some would be extremely  
good).

If the improved version of the adapter will also fix a few problems  
when used with Plone, it would still be good to have tests that  
provoke such circumstances and verify that the new implementation is  
indeed better.