Don't miss out Virtual Happy Hour this Friday (April 26).
Try our conversational search powered by Generative AI!
AI OnAI Off
How safe is it for pages and VPPs to share the same top-level URL segment?
I'm thinking most (all?) documents will have a file extension while friendly URLs won't, so IF a problem would arise I think it could be fixed fairly easily.
All in all, I don't see why this would pose any problems.
Apr 19, 2011 8:20
Hi Deane!
Conceptually, this would be no different than what You already have with the default
EPiServer-setup (but without the "foo"-part):
/
/Documents/document.pdf
There is nothing stopping a WebEditor to create a page named "Documents" under the Startpage and under that create pages
that might clash with files residing in the Documents-VPP.
However, as EPiServer defaults to insert the languagecomponent into the url ( /en/Documents/page-that-looks-like-a-file )
and that files usually have a filextension as Ted mentioned above, the risk of collisions would be minimal I think.
/johan
Apr 19, 2011 11:49
This topic was created over six months ago and has been resolved. If you have a similar question, please create a new topic and refer to this one.
I have a client who needs selected pages and binary files to roll up under the same top-level URL segment for their analytics. So, they need something like this:
They need this so both requests log until the "/foo" top-level URL segment.
I did some testing, and I created pages at:
I also created a VPP and mapped it to "~/foo/documents," so I have a file at:
Everything seems to work. I suppose someone could make a page under "foo" with the URL segment of "documents," and in that case, I believe the VPP would "win." I can just educate them not to do this.
My client is about to make a fairly binding decision about their grand analytics strategy over this. Am I missing anything? I've asked around, and the concensus is that it "should" work fine, but I'm looking for last-minute opinions on it.
Anyone see a problem here?