You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to users@tapestry.apache.org by Andreas Pardeike <ap...@fsys.se> on 2007/04/12 09:41:32 UTC
Tapestry 5 Redirects
On 12 apr 2007, at 03.29, Howard Lewis Ship wrote:
> Every request is a page redirect in T5. Check the URLs in the browser
> as you work through the application.
Is that clever design? I can think of several reasons why this could be
a bad idea. What's the reasoning behind this?
Andreas Pardeike
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
Re: Tapestry 5 Redirects
Posted by Massimo Lusetti <ml...@gmail.com>.
On 4/17/07, Alexandru Dragomir <al...@gmail.com> wrote:
> have you already tried this ?
>
> users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
asking a FAQ is boring
piggyback is annoying
answering a piggyback FAQ is sadistic
--
Massimo
http://meridio.blogspot.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
Re: Tapestry 5 Redirects
Posted by Alexandru Dragomir <al...@gmail.com>.
have you already tried this ?
users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
Cheers ,
Alex
On 4/17/07, li li <li...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi friends:
>
> Could you tell me how to unsubscribe the tapestry user maillist?
>
>
>
>
> *离人网 *
>
> ------------------------------
> From: *"Alexandru Dragomir" <al...@gmail.com>*
> Reply-To: *"Tapestry users" <us...@tapestry.apache.org>*
> To: *"Tapestry users" <us...@tapestry.apache.org>*
> Subject: *Re: Tapestry 5 Redirects*
> Date: *Tue, 17 Apr 2007 12:34:28 +0200*
> >I might be wrong (i haven't worked with phone browsers) but it think
> >is a
> >missunderstanding.
> >
> >The redirections are happening only on the server side. The client
> >only
> >knows of one request and one answer.
> >What is happening on the server - the redirects - are invisible to
> >the
> >client..
> >
> >Also , there are ways provided so that you don't need the session to
> >store
> >state (see activate/passivate i think)
> >
> >It only comes to the actual "network" overhead which should not be
> >high
> >since is happening inside the server..
> >
> >True ? ;)
> >
> >Cheers ,
> >Alex
> >
> >On 4/13/07, Patrick Moore <pa...@buildcap.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>well at least one reason is that phone browsers ask the user to
> >>confirm each and every client-side redirect
> >>
> >>On 4/12/07, Massimo Lusetti <ml...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > On 4/12/07, Andreas Pardeike <ap...@fsys.se> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > Is that clever design? I can think of several reasons why this
> >>could
> >>be
> >> > > a bad idea. What's the reasoning behind this?
> >> >
> >> > Redirects helps you keeping your url and page states cleans, i
> >>mean
> >> > helps you a lot.
> >> > Which use case do you think to address?
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > Massimo
> >> > http://meridio.blogspot.com
> >> >
> >> >
> >>---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
> >> > For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >>---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
> >>For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
> >>
> >>
>
>
> ------------------------------
> 使用世界上最大的电子邮件系统― MSN Hotmail <http://g.msn.com/8HMBCNCN/2755??PS=47575>--------------------------------------------------------------------- To
> unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org For additional
> commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
Re: Tapestry 5 Redirects
Posted by Howard Lewis Ship <hl...@gmail.com>.
NO, these are definitely client-side redirects. Thus the URL address in the
browser reflects the redirected-to location, and hitting refresh redidsplays
the result page, rather than re-executes the action (such as a form submit)
that led to the result page.
It may be necessary to "cross wire" things to support T4 style interactions
for applications that care, or are on phones (as has been outlined) ... it
would not be difficult.
On 4/17/07, Alexandru Dragomir <al...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> At a second thought , perhaps there could be different servers targeted
> for
> several redirects .
>
> Cheers ,
> Alex
>
> On 4/17/07, Alexandru Dragomir <al...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > I might be wrong (i haven't worked with phone browsers) but it think is
> a
> > missunderstanding.
> >
> > The redirections are happening only on the server side. The client only
> > knows of one request and one answer.
> > What is happening on the server - the redirects - are invisible to the
> > client..
> >
> > Also , there are ways provided so that you don't need the session to
> store
> > state (see activate/passivate i think)
> >
> > It only comes to the actual "network" overhead which should not be high
> > since is happening inside the server..
> >
> > True ? ;)
> >
> > Cheers ,
> > Alex
> >
> > On 4/13/07, Patrick Moore <pa...@buildcap.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > well at least one reason is that phone browsers ask the user to
> > > confirm each and every client-side redirect
> > >
> > > On 4/12/07, Massimo Lusetti <ml...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > On 4/12/07, Andreas Pardeike <ap...@fsys.se> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Is that clever design? I can think of several reasons why this
> could
> > > be
> > > > > a bad idea. What's the reasoning behind this?
> > > >
> > > > Redirects helps you keeping your url and page states cleans, i mean
> > > > helps you a lot.
> > > > Which use case do you think to address?
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Massimo
> > > > http://meridio.blogspot.com
> > > >
> > > >
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
> > > > For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
> > > For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
> > >
> > >
> >
>
--
Howard M. Lewis Ship
TWD Consulting, Inc.
Independent J2EE / Open-Source Java Consultant
Creator and PMC Chair, Apache Tapestry
Creator, Apache HiveMind
Professional Tapestry training, mentoring, support
and project work. http://howardlewisship.com
Re: Tapestry 5 Redirects
Posted by Alexandru Dragomir <al...@gmail.com>.
At a second thought , perhaps there could be different servers targeted for
several redirects .
Cheers ,
Alex
On 4/17/07, Alexandru Dragomir <al...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I might be wrong (i haven't worked with phone browsers) but it think is a
> missunderstanding.
>
> The redirections are happening only on the server side. The client only
> knows of one request and one answer.
> What is happening on the server - the redirects - are invisible to the
> client..
>
> Also , there are ways provided so that you don't need the session to store
> state (see activate/passivate i think)
>
> It only comes to the actual "network" overhead which should not be high
> since is happening inside the server..
>
> True ? ;)
>
> Cheers ,
> Alex
>
> On 4/13/07, Patrick Moore <pa...@buildcap.com> wrote:
> >
> > well at least one reason is that phone browsers ask the user to
> > confirm each and every client-side redirect
> >
> > On 4/12/07, Massimo Lusetti <ml...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On 4/12/07, Andreas Pardeike <ap...@fsys.se> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Is that clever design? I can think of several reasons why this could
> > be
> > > > a bad idea. What's the reasoning behind this?
> > >
> > > Redirects helps you keeping your url and page states cleans, i mean
> > > helps you a lot.
> > > Which use case do you think to address?
> > >
> > > --
> > > Massimo
> > > http://meridio.blogspot.com
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
> > > For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
> > >
> > >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
> >
> >
>
Re: Tapestry 5 Redirects
Posted by Alexandru Dragomir <al...@gmail.com>.
I might be wrong (i haven't worked with phone browsers) but it think is a
missunderstanding.
The redirections are happening only on the server side. The client only
knows of one request and one answer.
What is happening on the server - the redirects - are invisible to the
client..
Also , there are ways provided so that you don't need the session to store
state (see activate/passivate i think)
It only comes to the actual "network" overhead which should not be high
since is happening inside the server..
True ? ;)
Cheers ,
Alex
On 4/13/07, Patrick Moore <pa...@buildcap.com> wrote:
>
> well at least one reason is that phone browsers ask the user to
> confirm each and every client-side redirect
>
> On 4/12/07, Massimo Lusetti <ml...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On 4/12/07, Andreas Pardeike <ap...@fsys.se> wrote:
> >
> > > Is that clever design? I can think of several reasons why this could
> be
> > > a bad idea. What's the reasoning behind this?
> >
> > Redirects helps you keeping your url and page states cleans, i mean
> > helps you a lot.
> > Which use case do you think to address?
> >
> > --
> > Massimo
> > http://meridio.blogspot.com
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
> >
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
>
>
Re: Tapestry 5 Redirects
Posted by Patrick Moore <pa...@buildcap.com>.
not my phone ... (yet) it can't handle for example the date or time dropdown
picker in tapestry. dojo in general seems not phone browser friendly yet....
but looking at what the dojo people are saying -- as soon as better
emulators become available this will change.
one of our key markets is mobile workers who only have a phone browser
available to them. In the U.S. there are laws about government workers
using government computers to do any political work ( although the Bush
administration has recently been busted about ignoring that law ). So as a
result, if a political appointee needs to do campaign work during work hours
-- they must go outside and use their mobile phone.
So at least for my company, I really am expecting a huge % of users to be
mobile users.
-Pat
On 4/13/07, Massimo Lusetti <ml...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 4/13/07, Jesse Kuhnert <jk...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I think Patrick is right, phone browser concerns are becoming more and
> more
> > important as those platforms continue to evolve and get wider usage. I'm
> > always disappointed when I got to a site with no real mobile support on
> my
> > blackberry pearl.
>
> That's true as is true that mobiles devices are becoming more and more
> "web capable".
> I find more convenient to focus on typical and wide spread web
> application usage for T5 features implementation, then look at the
> rest.
> Can mobile devices take advantage of a feature rich form with ajax
> features? (no sarcasm in this question)
>
> --
> Massimo
> http://meridio.blogspot.com
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
>
>
Re: Tapestry 5 Redirects
Posted by Massimo Lusetti <ml...@gmail.com>.
On 4/13/07, Jesse Kuhnert <jk...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I think Patrick is right, phone browser concerns are becoming more and more
> important as those platforms continue to evolve and get wider usage. I'm
> always disappointed when I got to a site with no real mobile support on my
> blackberry pearl.
That's true as is true that mobiles devices are becoming more and more
"web capable".
I find more convenient to focus on typical and wide spread web
application usage for T5 features implementation, then look at the
rest.
Can mobile devices take advantage of a feature rich form with ajax
features? (no sarcasm in this question)
--
Massimo
http://meridio.blogspot.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
Re: Tapestry 5 Redirects
Posted by Jesse Kuhnert <jk...@gmail.com>.
I think Patrick is right, phone browser concerns are becoming more and more
important as those platforms continue to evolve and get wider usage. I'm
always disappointed when I got to a site with no real mobile support on my
blackberry pearl.
On 4/13/07, Massimo Lusetti <ml...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 4/13/07, Patrick Moore <pa...@buildcap.com> wrote:
>
> > well at least one reason is that phone browsers ask the user to
> > confirm each and every client-side redirect
>
> Phone browsers, well, typical target for web applications.
>
> --
> Massimo
> http://meridio.blogspot.com
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
>
>
--
Jesse Kuhnert
Tapestry/Dojo team member/developer
Open source based consulting work centered around
dojo/tapestry/tacos/hivemind. http://blog.opencomponentry.com
Re: Tapestry 5 Redirects
Posted by Massimo Lusetti <ml...@gmail.com>.
On 4/13/07, Patrick Moore <pa...@buildcap.com> wrote:
> well at least one reason is that phone browsers ask the user to
> confirm each and every client-side redirect
Phone browsers, well, typical target for web applications.
--
Massimo
http://meridio.blogspot.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
Re: Tapestry 5 Redirects
Posted by Massimo Lusetti <ml...@gmail.com>.
On 4/13/07, Andreas Pardeike <ap...@fsys.se> wrote:
> Forgive me if the following is wrong, but isn't it possible to have
> something like an edit context as in WebObjects that will not accept
> a second request with the same edit context ID?
>
> If one would keep track of requests to the server with a sequence id,
> it would be possible to process any request with an already handled
> id in a way that would ignore it and process it as a simple refresh
> of the page?
>
> I have a good friend in Germany who is now the mastermind behind
> Project Wonder which is the extension framework for WebObjects.
> Naturally,
> he's a WebObjects guru and usually points out the advantages of it
> compared with Tapestry. From what he tells me (and with the limited
> ability of me to digest it) I think that they use redirect-after-post
> only sporadic.
Really i don't know nothing about WebObjects, said that, what you're
talking about seems a neat features indeed.
--
Massimo
http://meridio.blogspot.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
Re: Tapestry 5 Redirects
Posted by Thiago H de Paula Figueiredo <th...@terra.com.br>.
On Fri, 13 Apr 2007 08:03:55 -0300, Andreas Pardeike <ap...@fsys.se> wrote:
> Forgive me if the following is wrong, but isn't it possible to have
> something like an edit context as in WebObjects that will not accept
> a second request with the same edit context ID?
I think tapestry-flash
(http://howardlewisship.com/tapestry-javaforge/tapestry-flash/) is the
answer to your question (it stores a value in the session but removes it
after it is first read), but tapestry-flash is for Tapestry 4. As far as I
know, it will be implemented in Tapestry 5 soon. :)
Thiago
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
Re: Tapestry 5 Redirects
Posted by Andreas Pardeike <ap...@fsys.se>.
Forgive me if the following is wrong, but isn't it possible to have
something like an edit context as in WebObjects that will not accept
a second request with the same edit context ID?
If one would keep track of requests to the server with a sequence id,
it would be possible to process any request with an already handled
id in a way that would ignore it and process it as a simple refresh
of the page?
I have a good friend in Germany who is now the mastermind behind
Project Wonder which is the extension framework for WebObjects.
Naturally,
he's a WebObjects guru and usually points out the advantages of it
compared with Tapestry. From what he tells me (and with the limited
ability of me to digest it) I think that they use redirect-after-post
only sporadic.
Andreas Pardeike
On 13 apr 2007, at 11.22, kranga wrote:
> Reasons I can think of:
>
> 1) Log analysis: Your page hit statistics and other log based audit
> and troubleshooting activity need to take this into account.
> 2) Extra unwanted delay and traffic in rendering pages.
>
> Storing page state in the session in general is a bad idea. When
> you have multiple browser windows connected to the same session,
> you have complete chaos.
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Patrick Moore"
> <pa...@buildcap.com>
> To: "Tapestry users" <us...@tapestry.apache.org>
> Sent: Friday, April 13, 2007 12:59 AM
> Subject: Re: Tapestry 5 Redirects
>
>
>> well at least one reason is that phone browsers ask the user to
>> confirm each and every client-side redirect
>>
>> On 4/12/07, Massimo Lusetti <ml...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On 4/12/07, Andreas Pardeike <ap...@fsys.se> wrote:
>>>
>>> > Is that clever design? I can think of several reasons why this
>>> could be
>>> > a bad idea. What's the reasoning behind this?
>>>
>>> Redirects helps you keeping your url and page states cleans, i mean
>>> helps you a lot.
>>> Which use case do you think to address?
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
Re: Tapestry 5 Redirects
Posted by Massimo Lusetti <ml...@gmail.com>.
On 4/15/07, kranga <kr...@k2d2.org> wrote:
> Why do you need numbers to understand that an extra redirect adds to
> rendering delay?
I can understand that but i would like to have an evidence that that
is causing performance problems.
> On storing values in session, why should I be forced to use a "flash"
> technology to handle session. A framework that attempts to be non-intrusive
> shouldn't force a session storage strategy because of the way it handles
> links! Doing a redirect on every link request is a very intrusive idea. I
> hope the Tap developers will re-evaluate this decision in light of the
> intrusiveness. As an example, lets say someone wanted to build ajax
> functionality on top of this link request. Every ajax request would be
> returned as a redirect response. Doesn't sound good.
That's not true, you can already return from an event listener method
and have the framework respond directly with data without a redirect
first.
--
Massimo
http://meridio.blogspot.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
Re: Tapestry 5 Redirects
Posted by kranga <kr...@k2d2.org>.
Why do you need numbers to understand that an extra redirect adds to
rendering delay?
On storing values in session, why should I be forced to use a "flash"
technology to handle session. A framework that attempts to be non-intrusive
shouldn't force a session storage strategy because of the way it handles
links! Doing a redirect on every link request is a very intrusive idea. I
hope the Tap developers will re-evaluate this decision in light of the
intrusiveness. As an example, lets say someone wanted to build ajax
functionality on top of this link request. Every ajax request would be
returned as a redirect response. Doesn't sound good.
A framework forcing you to do something because thats how it works - well,
that sounds like something Tap 5 was aiming to avoid. Or am I wrong on that?
----- Original Message -----
From: "Massimo Lusetti" <ml...@gmail.com>
To: "Tapestry users" <us...@tapestry.apache.org>
Sent: Friday, April 13, 2007 11:04 AM
Subject: Re: Tapestry 5 Redirects
> On 4/13/07, kranga <kr...@k2d2.org> wrote:
>
>> 1) Log analysis: Your page hit statistics and other log based audit and
>> troubleshooting activity need to take this into account.
>
> All requests fall in to logs, anyway logs are configurable server
> entities and are by no means related to application scope.
>
>> 2) Extra unwanted delay and traffic in rendering pages.
>
> Do you have numbers?
>
>> Storing page state in the session in general is a bad idea. When you have
>> multiple browser windows connected to the same session, you have complete
>> chaos.
>
> Someone has already answered your question in this thread.
>
>
> --
> Massimo
> http://meridio.blogspot.com
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
Re: Tapestry 5 Redirects
Posted by Massimo Lusetti <ml...@gmail.com>.
On 4/13/07, kranga <kr...@k2d2.org> wrote:
> 1) Log analysis: Your page hit statistics and other log based audit and
> troubleshooting activity need to take this into account.
All requests fall in to logs, anyway logs are configurable server
entities and are by no means related to application scope.
> 2) Extra unwanted delay and traffic in rendering pages.
Do you have numbers?
> Storing page state in the session in general is a bad idea. When you have
> multiple browser windows connected to the same session, you have complete
> chaos.
Someone has already answered your question in this thread.
--
Massimo
http://meridio.blogspot.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
Re: Tapestry 5 Redirects
Posted by kranga <kr...@k2d2.org>.
Reasons I can think of:
1) Log analysis: Your page hit statistics and other log based audit and
troubleshooting activity need to take this into account.
2) Extra unwanted delay and traffic in rendering pages.
Storing page state in the session in general is a bad idea. When you have
multiple browser windows connected to the same session, you have complete
chaos.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Patrick Moore" <pa...@buildcap.com>
To: "Tapestry users" <us...@tapestry.apache.org>
Sent: Friday, April 13, 2007 12:59 AM
Subject: Re: Tapestry 5 Redirects
> well at least one reason is that phone browsers ask the user to
> confirm each and every client-side redirect
>
> On 4/12/07, Massimo Lusetti <ml...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 4/12/07, Andreas Pardeike <ap...@fsys.se> wrote:
>>
>> > Is that clever design? I can think of several reasons why this could be
>> > a bad idea. What's the reasoning behind this?
>>
>> Redirects helps you keeping your url and page states cleans, i mean
>> helps you a lot.
>> Which use case do you think to address?
>>
>> --
>> Massimo
>> http://meridio.blogspot.com
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
>>
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
Re: Tapestry 5 Redirects
Posted by Patrick Moore <pa...@buildcap.com>.
well at least one reason is that phone browsers ask the user to
confirm each and every client-side redirect
On 4/12/07, Massimo Lusetti <ml...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 4/12/07, Andreas Pardeike <ap...@fsys.se> wrote:
>
> > Is that clever design? I can think of several reasons why this could be
> > a bad idea. What's the reasoning behind this?
>
> Redirects helps you keeping your url and page states cleans, i mean
> helps you a lot.
> Which use case do you think to address?
>
> --
> Massimo
> http://meridio.blogspot.com
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
Re: Tapestry 5 Redirects
Posted by Massimo Lusetti <ml...@gmail.com>.
On 4/12/07, Andreas Pardeike <ap...@fsys.se> wrote:
> Is that clever design? I can think of several reasons why this could be
> a bad idea. What's the reasoning behind this?
Redirects helps you keeping your url and page states cleans, i mean
helps you a lot.
Which use case do you think to address?
--
Massimo
http://meridio.blogspot.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org