path_prefix vs. nested resource

[Michael Kirk]

In the config/routes.rb, Is there a reason for using a path prefix for
the organization versus having all those resources be nested within an
organization?

e.g. why not something like this:

map.resources :organization do |organization|
organization.resources :tags, :people, :vists, :services, :notes, :taggins
end

I'm not really aware of what the technical difference is, but
semantically, it seems like people, visits, services, notes, and
tagging are resources of the organization. What does the use of a path
prefix imply?

M

[Alon Salant]

It's been a couple years since I made that decision so let me see if I
can recall.

I think it is to address two desires:

1. Organization key
I wanted to be able to have the organization identified by a chosen
key rather than /organizations/[id]. This is like using the host name
and is where I had been planning to take things. - sfbk.freehub.org or
something like that. The path_prefix approach seemed like it would be
easier to switch to that strategy.

2. path helpers
As nested resources, the path helpers become
organization_people_path,... instead of people_path. Not a big deal
but more verbose and not necessarily the mindset you have when
building pages.

Nested resources would not be a bad idea, just not the direction I
chose at the time.

Alon

> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Freehub Users" group.
> To post to this group, send email to freehu...@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to freehub-user...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/freehub-users?hl=en.
>
>