Yes good point. I guess I question why we process invalid URL's as if they were correct. But as long as we support this, you are right the inconsistency between client and server URL generation must be in sync.Hi Nick,Obviously this change makes the generation of URL inconsistently between server and client side (with JS). In addition, we did support a capability to allow the request URI containing extra information so far, and Portal can find the best match navigation node from the URI to show up the corresponding page ==> so we can not just cut it off
Unless you relied on invalid path information to be contained, I'm not sure.
In eXo Platform product side, it is also using these JS variables to build the url, therefore there will be probably impacts to its behaviors.
I'll take a look and see. Thanks !If this change is just a consequence of the XSS fix from https://issues.jboss.org/browse/GTNPORTAL-2769. I do think that GTNPORTAL-2769 would be handled in better way. Actually we did fix the problem in EXOGTN without changing usage of node path (refer to https://github.com/exoplatform/exogtn/commit/f22356d). Maybe we should go in the way as EXOGTN does.
WDYT ?
On 30 July 2013 23:23, Nick Scavelli <nscavell@redhat.com> wrote:
TLDR: eXo.env.server.portalBaseURL and eXo.env.server.portalURLTemplate have changed to include only the resolved path.
I've made a change (http://git.io/ogoWhw) which has only been applied to master so it can resonate a bit in hopes there are no issues. I have added a resolvedNodePath field to PortalRequestContext (even though I think nodePath should be changed) to represent the resolved path of the portal. Meaning if I go to URL /portal/classic/home/foo the resolved path is just /home not /home/foo.
The reason for this change was that a fix was applied to decode the nodePath in order to avoid XSS in the URL since we use this value to create the JavaScript variables eXo.env.server.portalBaseURL and eXo.env.server.portalURLTemplate. However this caused an issue for non-ascii node names since the route couldn't be found after decoding. I think the resolvedNodePath is a better solution however it does change the behavior of the JS variables I mentioned.
If anyone sees a potential issue with this solution please discuss here.
- Nick
_______________________________________________
gatein-dev mailing list
gatein-dev@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/gatein-dev
--
Trong Tran
(+84) 983841909 | trongtt@gmail.com
Twitter: http://twitter.com/trongtt