XSSFilter could not parse (X)HTML:
<p>From sputnik-list-bounces@lists.luaforge.net Fri Jan 30 08:55:55 2009
Received: from pop.gmail.com (ag-in-f109.google.com [72.14.247.109])</p>
<pre><code>by localhost (mpop-1.0.11) with POP3
for <yuri>; Fri, 30 Jan 2009 08:55:55 +0000
</code></pre>
<p>Delivered-To: sputnik.list.archiver@gmail.com
Received: by 10.142.12.9 with SMTP id 9cs183836wfl;</p>
<pre><code> Wed, 21 Jan 2009 03:34:29 -0800 (PST)
</code></pre>
<p>Received: by 10.100.91.3 with SMTP id o3mr2423236anb.66.1232537668894;</p>
<pre><code> Wed, 21 Jan 2009 03:34:28 -0800 (PST)
</code></pre>
<p>Return-Path: <a href="mailto:sputnik-list-bounces@lists.luaforge.net">sputnik-list-bounces@lists.luaforge.net</a>
Received: from mail.luaforge.net (www.luaforge.net [147.65.1.201])</p>
<pre><code> by mx.google.com with ESMTP id c29si10080117anc.43.2009.01.21.03.34.17;
Wed, 21 Jan 2009 03:34:28 -0800 (PST)
</code></pre>
<p>Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of sputnik-list-bounces@lists.luaforge.net designates 147.65.1.201 as permitted sender) client-ip=147.65.1.201;
Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of sputnik-list-bounces@lists.luaforge.net designates 147.65.1.201 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=sputnik-list-bounces@lists.luaforge.net; dkim=neutral (body hash did not verify) header.i=@gmail.com
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=localhost.localdomain)</p>
<pre><code>by mail.luaforge.net with esmtp (Exim 4.50)
id 1LPdAm-0001hX-HH; Wed, 21 Jan 2009 11:31:12 -0200
</code></pre>
<p>Received: from yx-out-2324.google.com ([74.125.44.29])</p>
<pre><code>by mail.luaforge.net with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1LPdAk-0001hO-NA
for sputnik-list@lists.luaforge.net; Wed, 21 Jan 2009 11:31:11 -0200
</code></pre>
<p>Received: by yx-out-2324.google.com with SMTP id 3so1381567yxj.89</p>
<pre><code>for <sputnik-list@lists.luaforge.net>;
Wed, 21 Jan 2009 03:34:04 -0800 (PST)
</code></pre>
<p>DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma;</p>
<pre><code>h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references
:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type
:content-transfer-encoding;
bh=vivM2S4J+PFTmz6PSh+QOkhxbHhzdcGKvNjPNYQJRC0=;
b=Hhgo23GhNZ2KuxNIuhpoaflzCJ+zAlsPTY6Zx78SZ/RsfgUOn5CMYJwcteY8PDzzkO
G2o8S9duYg4cvRZE2VLVXGHnPcKzsvgf0Ehr6nB8sLjF0+6MzZzvAl/j9VOjARNSI9hM
LtoFkBTR4MYkcnhLbKRl599M8F1BhN8Mp29lw=
</code></pre>
<p>DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma;</p>
<pre><code>h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
:content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
b=Ea3zD3e2Es1juN6hPrHIPPwIMmwwyheMb/Mp+xk28h0l4vAu/OqzAdJMCQdsEwyskw
FtqsDiiWt/o/GYV8TMb29wiEvSh8j3mWDbXOU3EjGz7MtE9heJhe6maPZzXLbA156PKd
6HQ4Bc6qG50KPK8e5PMhWcgW0V4m3p4+eMnNc=
</code></pre>
<p>MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.151.6.2 with SMTP id j2mr102549ybi.127.1232537644002; Wed, 21 </p>
<pre><code>Jan 2009 03:34:04 -0800 (PST)
</code></pre>
<p>In-Reply-To: <a href="mailto:5fe281d40901210333v27995e45o1a32dce48c42d0d5@mail.gmail.com">5fe281d40901210333v27995e45o1a32dce48c42d0d5@mail.gmail.com</a>
References: <a href="mailto:b6bf6c640901190708h14482601lc521a0c1b21e2d9@mail.gmail.com">b6bf6c640901190708h14482601lc521a0c1b21e2d9@mail.gmail.com</a></p>
<pre><code><5fe281d40901190719u7cdf2386v32d1aa4581b17152@mail.gmail.com>
<92ab989c0901190756h1689fa44k4185822e434c8f2d@mail.gmail.com>
<5fe281d40901190803l314f23cav49d3b27c5257baf5@mail.gmail.com>
<92ab989c0901190820s5075e261i2314161a384a89cc@mail.gmail.com>
<fa4efbc00901192023h4793ea20vfd27ada5693ecb51@mail.gmail.com>
<92ab989c0901201543g48948c22t63cc766118c2f791@mail.gmail.com>
<5fe281d40901201718x7ea04558sf4e52387bceb22e1@mail.gmail.com>
<fa4efbc00901201753y2601fcbes7dea82293d065c23@mail.gmail.com>
<5fe281d40901210333v27995e45o1a32dce48c42d0d5@mail.gmail.com>
</code></pre>
<p>Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2009 11:34:03 +0000
Message-ID: <a href="mailto:5fe281d40901210334p736e14b1s7ffeef80eea19a36@mail.gmail.com">5fe281d40901210334p736e14b1s7ffeef80eea19a36@mail.gmail.com</a>
Subject: Fwd: [Sputnik-list] Filter nodes
From: Jim Whitehead II <a href="mailto:jnwhiteh@gmail.com">jnwhiteh@gmail.com</a>
To: Sputnik <a href="mailto:sputnik-list@lists.luaforge.net">sputnik-list@lists.luaforge.net</a>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-BeenThere: sputnik-list@lists.luaforge.net
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: "An all-purpose list for now." <sputnik-list.lists.luaforge.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <a href="http://lists.luaforge.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sputnik-list">http://lists.luaforge.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sputnik-list</a>,</p>
<pre><code><mailto:sputnik-list-request@lists.luaforge.net?subject=unsubscribe>
</code></pre>
<p>List-Archive: <a href="http://lists.luaforge.net/pipermail/sputnik-list">http://lists.luaforge.net/pipermail/sputnik-list</a>
List-Post: <a href="mailto:sputnik-list@lists.luaforge.net">sputnik-list@lists.luaforge.net</a>
List-Help: <a href="mailto:sputnik-list-request@lists.luaforge.net?subject=help">sputnik-list-request@lists.luaforge.net?subject=help</a>
List-Subscribe: <a href="http://lists.luaforge.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sputnik-list">http://lists.luaforge.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sputnik-list</a>,</p>
<pre><code><mailto:sputnik-list-request@lists.luaforge.net?subject=subscribe>
</code></pre>
<p>Sender: sputnik-list-bounces@lists.luaforge.net
Errors-To: sputnik-list-bounces@lists.luaforge.net</p>
<p>On 1/21/09, Yuri Takhteyev <a href="mailto:yuri@sims.berkeley.edu">yuri@sims.berkeley.edu</a> wrote:</p>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<p>I would argue pretty heavily against doing anything before checking to
see if the full node exists. I don't see what the above gains us that
we don't have by swapping 1 and 2. I agree with the overall change in
strategy.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>I am not sure what you mean. If we switch 1 and 2 then we are
essentially back to where we are right now, unless there is a clear
difference between child<em>handlers and child</em>defaults. (If they both
happen after checking the node, then they might as well be merged.) So
there is not change in strategy. Which perhaps is fine.</p>
<p>I think we need specific use cases before we understand if a change is
worthwhile at this point. If we cannot come up with specific examples
of things that we cannot do with the current design, then I would
stick with what we have for now.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>To be a bit clearer, hopefully, I'm not sure I understand why we're
considering such a change in behavior when we can add parameters like
we're discussing without altering the way things currently work.</p>
<p>Why do you choose the first level node to check child handlers rather
than some other arbitrary level. That is assuming something about the
URL structure of the wiki and doesn't seem to make sense.</p>
<p>I prefer that the entire node id is always checked first. Its fast and
if that node exists I would hope that you'd want to serve it. Failing
that we can check the root node and work our way in the chain from
left to right. Certainly even this changes the semantics of node
processing now but I do not believe we have any cases where this would
break anything.</p>
<p>My primary disagreement is not checking to see if the full node exists
before taking any other action. It's the cheapest thing that we can
do and it's the default case in a non-application heavy wiki.</p>
<p>Hope that makes sense,</p>
<ul>
<li>Jim</li>
</ul>
<hr/>
<p>Sputnik-list mailing list
Sputnik-list@lists.luaforge.net
http://lists.luaforge.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sputnik-list</p>
