Gossamer Forum
Home : Products : Gossamer Links : Discussions :

Configurable Main field, instead just using fixed URL field

Quote Reply
Configurable Main field, instead just using fixed URL field
Continuing the
http://www.gossamer-threads.com/...orum.cgi?post=226760
thread here. The discussion started in that thread.

The following post was the starting point:
It's my old problem, that Links & Links SQL always use the URL as Main field, tough Links & Links SQL can be used more widely than just for link categorizing.

The main field should be configurable in the Admin config, the URL field should be the default, but could be changed to any other field....

It is possible, that I will implement this config option into my plugins.
But would be better, that Alex & GT staff add the option into the Admin config.

Best regards,
Webmaster33


Paid Support
from Webmaster33. Expert in Perl programming & Gossamer Threads applications. (click here for prices)
Webmaster33's products (upd.2004.09.26) | Private message | Contact me | Was my post helpful? Donate my help...

Last edited by:

webmaster33: Dec 30, 2002, 3:51 AM
Quote Reply
Re: [webmaster33] Configurable Main field, instead just using fixed URL field In reply to
It would be just as easy to leave the URL as it is and ignore it. Everything will work as it is, without having to do massive code changes, bug fixes, and such.

Many of my sites do not use a "url". Some I have the URL pointing internally to a file location or image. This is the first change I made to Links when I started running the postcards directory was to link to the internal image file. This was before image uploads, File fields, and such.

Validate Links, Duplicate, etc use the URL, since it's supposedly a UNIQUE identifier on the Internet, similar to a phone number or physical address (complete physical address).

The "key" field in the system is the ID, which is the "unique" record as far as MySQL is concerned.

You can reset weights, regex's and such to make the fields not required. You can edit MySQL to allow "null" values, and similar.

But, for a "links" directory, the URL field is special. How many sites have the same physical name?

How many images have the same file name??

The only thing that differentiates them is the "URL" (physical location).

Jump.cgi works *really* well on the ID number, and minor rewrites of the 'go' or 'location' command will let jump.cgi jump you to an image, a detail page, or anything else you want to "jump" to from that ID. You can also modify jump.cgi to accept parameters, to jump to a page if you send in nnnn.html and to the link itself if you just send in nnnn, etc.

I've found jump.cgi to be the most fun file to modify over the years, :) And I keep saying so <G>


PUGDOG� Enterprises, Inc.

The best way to contact me is to NOT use Email.
Please leave a PM here.
Quote Reply
Re: [pugdog] Configurable Main field, instead just using fixed URL field In reply to
In Reply To:
It would be just as easy to leave the URL as it is and ignore it. Everything will work as it is, without having to do massive code changes, bug fixes, and such.
I did this way. Wink
I also use URL in my classifies ad system, but URL is not the unique key, what distinguishes dupe records. ID is unique for each record. But the descriptions should be unique for a category or optionally for the whole site (also it may be possible, to even mark e.g. 80% similar descriptions as duplicate). And of course auto dupe checking depends on the config, can be turned on-off.
That's how it currently works on my site, which uses a very modified/customized Links 2.0.
I'm just adapting that working solution to Links SQL. So I talk about something that works, and I share my experience & suggestions in that subject.


In Reply To:
Validate Links, Duplicate, etc use the URL, since it's supposedly a UNIQUE identifier on the Internet, similar to a phone number or physical address (complete physical address).

The "key" field in the system is the ID, which is the "unique" record as far as MySQL is concerned.

But, for a "links" directory, the URL field is special. How many sites have the same physical name?
How many images have the same file name??
The only thing that differentiates them is the "URL" (physical location).
Validate Links requires URL? Nope. Validate Links can be anything that user suggests. Even a description about a homesite or a news item... Or I'm wrong?

Even the Link Status can be used for other goal than URL... Would mean a manual checking of e.g. news items, if they are good or bad for displaying on the site. Just an example and that's just hypothetic.
Well, Verify Links really sticks to URLs. That one can not be used for other task (at least I can not imagine now).

But as explained, Duplicate checking can be based on almost any field, depending what kind of project are you working on... (e.g. for an email database e-mail address must be the UNIQUE key).
The possibilities of Links SQL are almost infinite... I showed several examples in preceding thread, like news manager, content manager, classified ad manager. These are mainly text based and not URL based tasks...
Therefore the Main field idea could be implemented into the Duplicate checking to fit these needs (well I do not know, if that Main field idea could be used also on other functions, than Duplicate checking, but it may be possible).
I think several LSQL users (who use LSQL for a project for tasks like those I listed in the examples) would welcome this modification.

Best regards,
Webmaster33


Paid Support
from Webmaster33. Expert in Perl programming & Gossamer Threads applications. (click here for prices)
Webmaster33's products (upd.2004.09.26) | Private message | Contact me | Was my post helpful? Donate my help...

Last edited by:

webmaster33: Dec 30, 2002, 4:52 PM
Quote Reply
Re: [webmaster33] Configurable Main field, instead just using fixed URL field In reply to
If you flag your database field as "unique" then no one could enter an exact same record in that field. You wouldn't have "duplicate checking" enabled, but duplicates could not be entered into the database to begin with.


PUGDOG� Enterprises, Inc.

The best way to contact me is to NOT use Email.
Please leave a PM here.
Quote Reply
Re: [pugdog] Configurable Main field, instead just using fixed URL field In reply to
That's not a good solution as a raw sql error would show to the user - better to write a plugin.
Quote Reply
Re: [pugdog] Configurable Main field, instead just using fixed URL field In reply to
As Paul pointed out, the unique field flag would not result a flexible solution.

Yes, I will likely write a plugin for that task, but I think the idea could be implemented as core part of LSQL, because LSQL need to be more flexible, and not just link (URL) related application.
If I write a plugin, it will be commercial plugin, and some people will be not able to afford to pay for it.
If would be implemented as core part, more people could use it.

Seems that I'm against my business with that suggestion, but as my experience shows, likely my plugin will be even earlier finished, than to see my suggestions implemented into core Links SQL. Unsure

Best regards,
Webmaster33


Paid Support
from Webmaster33. Expert in Perl programming & Gossamer Threads applications. (click here for prices)
Webmaster33's products (upd.2004.09.26) | Private message | Contact me | Was my post helpful? Donate my help...
Quote Reply
Re: [webmaster33] Configurable Main field, instead just using fixed URL field In reply to
Quote:
Seems that I'm against my business with that suggestion, but as my experience shows, likely my plugin will be even earlier finished, than to see my suggestions implemented into core Links SQL.

Before you jump all over me, I'm not having a go at you, but you have to understand that not all your suggestions will be implemented into the core code. Additions are reviewed thoroughly and the staff will not add every suggestion made on the forum so you are being unfair to say what you said above.
Quote Reply
Re: [Paul] Configurable Main field, instead just using fixed URL field In reply to
Ok. Yes, I know, not all suggestions will be implemented, of course. They are ranked on to do list.
But I feel, that development of Links SQL slowed down a bit, because of the other developments.

That's why I feel, I will earlier finish my plugins, than to see my suggestions back in Links SQL.
But I aggree with what you said.

Best regards,
Webmaster33


Paid Support
from Webmaster33. Expert in Perl programming & Gossamer Threads applications. (click here for prices)
Webmaster33's products (upd.2004.09.26) | Private message | Contact me | Was my post helpful? Donate my help...