Vote on RFC 31?

[Daniel Morissette]

I took the liberty of doing a few minor edits to fix the Plone warnings 
that the RFC page was producing, and I also marked the page as 
published. I hope you don't mind.

About URLCONFIG, since it's a REGEX, should its value not be delimited 
by /.../ to be consistent with use of REGEX in other places?

Also, can you confirm (and perhaps clarify in the rfc) that the 
URLCONFIG pattern is applied only to the map_* variable name and not to 
its value? If the filter is applied also to the value then the example 
in the RFC (URLCONFIG 'scalebar') would not be enough to limit setting 
only scalebar via URL since the following URL would also pass the test:


...map_layer=STATUS+ON+#scalebar

Actually, while trying to craft the example above I realized that I 
didn't know how to specify which layer I wanted to alter. For instance, 
if I want to update layer named "roads" is it enough to include the 
"NAME roads" in the value or do I need to use "map_layer_roads" as the 
URL variable name? An example showing how to do that in the RFC would help.

Daniel

Steve Lime wrote:
> Hi all: I'd like to call for a vote on RFC 31. I updated the RFC to try and deal with the points raised. The most significant addition was more elaboration on security related to URL parameter setting. I propose a URLCONFIG parameter addition to the webObj that has dual purposes, 1) to allow URL configuration and 2) to further filter the config string.
> 
> The RFC does not address writing to strings as mentioned by Tamas (although I think it's a neat idea). 
> 
> Please let me know if there are additional concerns, suggestions or clarifications necessary.
> 
> Steve (I'm +1 BTW)


-- 
Daniel Morissette
http://www.mapgears.com/