What does the Container checkbox actually do?

Quote from: Eol at Aug 24, 2009, 02:55 PM

Quote from: OpenGeek at Aug 24, 2009, 09:56 AM

NO! The toggle needs to remain. There is a difference between isfolder (i.e. the Container checkbox) and the presence/absence of children!

Happy to be 1%-er here!

Eol, do you use the Container flag separate from the presence of actually having children, and if so, how?

Quote from: rthrash at Aug 24, 2009, 03:43 PM

Quote from: Eol at Aug 24, 2009, 02:55 PM

Quote from: OpenGeek at Aug 24, 2009, 09:56 AM

NO! The toggle needs to remain. There is a difference between isfolder (i.e. the Container checkbox) and the presence/absence of children!

Happy to be 1%-er here!

Eol, do you use the Container flag separate from the presence of actually having children, and if so, how?

Don’t know about Eol, but I’ve used it several times. The first is when delivering xml content from a Resource that has children; I needed the Resource to have the .xml file extension. Making it not be a container allows me to do that in Revo, yet it can still have children. Another reason was just to make a page fit an existing URL structure without having to create a duplicate that was a container, i.e. as a container, my alias foo becomes foo/, but I needed foo.html despite needing to also have foo/child1.html and foo/child2.html. I’m sure it will be useful in many similar situations.

Those are great uses indeed Jason. Maybe we should look at the way URL rewriting is handled, or reorganize / relabel the Container field in general to make it more clear as to sound usage cases. I don’t think it’s all that clear based on how it behaves now, and better URL / URL-path handling is certainly as good a use case as any to merit reworking it that way. I’d be interested to hear how others use the flag, too.

Quote from: OpenGeek at Aug 24, 2009, 04:14 PM

Don’t know about Eol, but I’ve used it several times. The first is when delivering xml content from a Resource that has children; I needed the Resource to have the .xml file extension. Making it not be a container allows me to do that in Revo, yet it can still have children. Another reason was just to make a page fit an existing URL structure without having to create a duplicate that was a container, i.e. as a container, my alias foo becomes foo/, but I needed foo.html despite needing to also have foo/child1.html and foo/child2.html. I’m sure it will be useful in many similar situations.

In Evo, a container with children and content gets the .html suffix whether you want it or not. With friendly alias path on, the children get foo/child.html.

Quote from: BobRay at Aug 24, 2009, 05:48 PM

In Evo, a container with children and content gets the .html suffix whether you want it or not. With friendly alias path on, the children get foo/child.html.

Correct, in terms of FURL generation, but actually, in Evo, all Resources respond to the URL with the friendly_url_suffix or without, or even with a trailing slash. However, in Revo, suffixes are defined by content type (unless it’s a text/html content type and a container; see the container_suffix System Setting which has a default of "/"), and Resources only respond strictly to the explicit URL. This is why it’s important to me to be able to explicitly define if a Resource behaves as a physical web folder or a physical web file, regardless if it contains children or not.

Quote from: rthrash at Aug 24, 2009, 03:43 PM

Eol, do you use the Container flag separate from the presence of actually having children, and if so, how?

Yes, here is my example:
node on a second level of site hierarchy aggregates some documents from a different subtree, but needs to be filtered out from various Ditto lists on a first level (conceptually this node IS a folder). So, I check container flag on that document, and then use Ditto parameter hideFolders to skip it in the listing...