[Zope] Opinions sought on acquisition issue

[Michael R. Bernstein]

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.