FAQ
Here at work we have this rule that the page urls should not contain
any parameters (think page number, sorting order etc) - but that
everything should be hidden in the session. I think I can have some
fighting chance to counter that trend if I feed the bosses with some
authoritative enough documents. Do you guys know something fitting?
Or maybe it is me who is mistaken - and this is a great idea indeed?

Search Discussions

  • Jay Shirley at Feb 26, 2009 at 5:06 pm

    On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 8:54 AM, Zbigniew Lukasiak wrote:

    Here at work we have this rule that the page urls should not contain
    any parameters (think page number, sorting order etc) - but that
    everything should be hidden in the session. I think I can have some
    fighting chance to counter that trend if I feed the bosses with some
    authoritative enough documents. Do you guys know something fitting?
    Or maybe it is me who is mistaken - and this is a great idea indeed?

    --
    Zbigniew Lukasiak
    http://brudnopis.blogspot.com/
    http://perlalchemy.blogspot.com/
    How do you go about sending a link to the 3rd or 4th page of a result set
    (or bookmarking)? General principles seem that a GET request should show
    these results, and you should be able to reproduce the page without previous
    requests.

    -J
    -------------- next part --------------
    An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
    URL: http://lists.scsys.co.uk/pipermail/catalyst/attachments/20090226/b55416ac/attachment.htm
  • Sebastian Willert at Feb 26, 2009 at 5:33 pm

    On Thu, 2009-02-26 at 09:06 -0800, J. Shirley wrote:
    On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 8:54 AM, Zbigniew Lukasiak wrote:
    Here at work we have this rule that the page urls should not
    contain
    any parameters (think page number, sorting order etc) - but
    that
    everything should be hidden in the session. I think I can
    have some
    fighting chance to counter that trend if I feed the bosses
    with some
    authoritative enough documents. Do you guys know something
    fitting?
    Or maybe it is me who is mistaken - and this is a great idea
    indeed?

    --
    Zbigniew Lukasiak
    http://brudnopis.blogspot.com/
    http://perlalchemy.blogspot.com/


    How do you go about sending a link to the 3rd or 4th page of a result
    set (or bookmarking)? General principles seem that a GET request
    should show these results, and you should be able to reproduce the
    page without previous requests.
    .. and you are totally screwed if your users decide to open a link
    within your app in a new tab or window and you depend on persistent
    navigational parameters. This includes AJAX requests. Arguing that you
    lose the potential for page-specific AJAX requests (replace this term
    with Web.two.dot.oh.ishness depending on your bosses hair style) should
    get you a long way in most organizations.

    Cheers,
    Sebastian
  • F00li5h at Feb 27, 2009 at 12:04 am

    On Fri, 27 Feb 2009 03:54:04 +1100, Zbigniew Lukasiak wrote:

    Here at work we have this rule that the page urls should not contain
    any parameters (think page number, sorting order etc) - but that
    everything should be hidden in the session. I think I can have some
    fighting chance to counter that trend if I feed the bosses with some
    authoritative enough documents. Do you guys know something fitting?
    Or maybe it is me who is mistaken - and this is a great idea indeed?
    Is it just GET parameters that are forbidden? Can you get away with using path segments?
    can you use /foo/cats/paged/3 and still fit this "rule"?

    Also, hiding things in the session will get you silly results (and not the good kind of silly) and a confused user when the session expires while the user is not looking.

    user clicks "next page"
    user meets login page
    all state is lost when new session is created
    user comes looking for a spine to put an axe in

    --
    =^_^=
    ($site = $email) =~ s/\@/./;
  • Aristotle Pagaltzis at Feb 27, 2009 at 3:11 am
    Users will not be e able to use the back button, and they will
    not be able to work in multiple tabs. You will not be able to
    load-balance as effectively as you could without sessions. A lot
    of your content will be hidden from search engines. I could think
    of more, but that should be enough for a start.

    If you need an argument from authority, ask why none of the
    biggest sites like Google, Amayon, etc do it that way.

    Regards,
    --
    Aristotle Pagaltzis // <http://plasmasturm.org/>
  • Zbigniew Lukasiak at Feb 27, 2009 at 7:12 am

    On Fri, Feb 27, 2009 at 4:11 AM, Aristotle Pagaltzis wrote:
    Users will not be e able to use the back button, and they will
    not be able to work in multiple tabs. You will not be able to
    load-balance as effectively as you could without sessions. A lot
    of your content will be hidden from search engines. I could think
    of more, but that should be enough for a start.
    Thanks for you all for the arguments. The crazy thing is that they
    believe that with some
    Javascript magic we'll be able to manage the multiple tabs and back
    button problem.
    If you need an argument from authority, ask why none of the
    biggest sites like Google, Amayon, etc do it that way.
    :) - this has potential.
  • Hans Dieter Pearcey at Feb 27, 2009 at 7:25 am

    On Fri, Feb 27, 2009 at 08:12:55AM +0100, Zbigniew Lukasiak wrote:
    Thanks for you all for the arguments. The crazy thing is that they
    believe that with some
    Javascript magic we'll be able to manage the multiple tabs and back
    button problem.
    And now you have three problems.

    hdp.
  • Aristotle Pagaltzis at Feb 27, 2009 at 1:29 pm

    * Zbigniew Lukasiak [2009-02-27 08:20]:
    The crazy thing is that they believe that with some Javascript
    magic we'll be able to manage the multiple tabs and back button
    problem.
    If you want to deal with all the crossbrowser issues and then
    have to maintain that code forever. As well as the session
    management code. You are basically adding a fragile heap of
    complexity just so you can reinvent functionalitity that browsers
    and HTTP already offer.

    And for what? The users will *hate* it. No, really, they will
    notice and they *will* hate it.

    Wise allocation of developer resources?

    Regards,
    --
    Aristotle Pagaltzis // <http://plasmasturm.org/>
  • Aristotle Pagaltzis at Feb 27, 2009 at 1:35 pm

    * Aristotle Pagaltzis [2009-02-27 14:29]:
    And for what? The users will *hate* it. No, really, they will
    notice and they *will* hate it.

    Wise allocation of developer resources?
    Oh, and I forgot: sprinkling Javascript magic on it won?t fix
    the inability of search engines to see the majority of your
    content.

    Regards,
    --
    Aristotle Pagaltzis // <http://plasmasturm.org/>
  • Tomas Doran at Feb 27, 2009 at 9:11 am

    On 26 Feb 2009, at 16:54, Zbigniew Lukasiak wrote:
    I think I can have some
    fighting chance to counter that trend if I feed the bosses with some
    authoritative enough documents.
    From the horses mouth (Tim Berners-Lee) in 1991:

    http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/UI.html
    Some basic principles: >
    1. Anything of any value and persistence must have a URI so that
    it can be referenced (yes, I
    know Microsoft have a Moniker scheme but now it has to be URIs to
    go global).
    >
    2. Any place I can use a URI I can use any URI. >
    3. Links are an evident as a primary user interface metaphor, with
    a consistent drag/drop or
    control/drag/drop for link creation, and consistent ways of
    viewing by link type.
    >
    4. The system should generate persistent URIs wherever possible.
    These can be just URLs in
    file or http space but they should not change. This is a longer
    term thing.

    and in 1996: http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/Axioms.html
    Axiom 0a: Universality 2 >
    Any resource of significance should be given a URI. >
    <snip> >
    This means that no information which has any significance and
    persistence should be made
    available in a way that one cannot refer to it with a URI.
    I think those both make the point nicely. Are those authoritative
    enough for you? :)

    Cheers
    t0m

Related Discussions

Discussion Navigation
viewthread | post
Discussion Overview
groupcatalyst @
categoriescatalyst, perl
postedFeb 26, '09 at 4:54p
activeFeb 27, '09 at 1:35p
posts10
users7
websitecatalystframework.org
irc#catalyst

People

Translate

site design / logo © 2022 Grokbase