Skip to main content

This site requires you to update your browser. Your browsing experience maybe affected by not having the most up to date version.

Archive /

Our old forums are still available as a read-only archive.

Moderators: martimiz, Sean, Ed, biapar, Willr, Ingo

Urls, why no 'sublevel' urls?

Go to End

51 Posts   34014 Views


Community Member, 3 Posts

4 August 2008 at 7:06pm

Edited: 04/08/2008 7:07pm

ModX references everything by its ID number e.g., index.php?id=50. Even when using aliases it seems to be restricted to 1 layer. See their documentation section. I just had a play on the demo and I couldn't even get to my test page because it didn't show up in the menus.

Drupal appears to use the same /module/function/parameter/ format as other CMSs e.g., /node/20/. Looks quite powerful/customisable/complication.

Matt Hardwick

Community Member, 61 Posts

18 August 2008 at 2:56am


I totally agree with what you are saying.
Running a large site with 100s of pages, I really don't like the idea of not having sub-levels.
I run the website for a radio station,

and instead of having /show1 /show2 etc. which could easily get confusing, I want to be able to have /shows/1 /shows/2. This also means that if someone just wants shows, they can go to shows and get a list 1,2 etc.

Or /programming/music would make more sense than just /music because /music makes it seem like it's OUR music, not music we play as part of our programming.

I will be glad when this is merged in to the core - it's the biggest thing that SilverStripe is missing... I would say it's what has stopped me from moving all my sites to it, and I don't think I will have been the only person that has been put off the system because of it.


Community Member, 791 Posts

18 August 2008 at 9:56am

Have to agree.

Although I don't necessarily want it myself, we haven't been able to convert some sites because of a specialized SEO company involved which demanded nested URL's ......

This will be a great feature!


Community Member, 712 Posts

18 August 2008 at 10:11am

Bit late in the game, but is there any reason multi-level urls have to be in the format:

Specifically - I'm not aware of any particular reason that slashes have to be used as delimiters - I'm not sure that google makes a distinction between that and (for example):,minor-level,page

This avoids the conflict issue, and would also allow the director a bit more flexibility.

Semantically, the slashes might be more common, but then having method calls at the end isn't particularly semantic so it shouldn't really be a concern.


Community Member, 244 Posts

18 August 2008 at 7:52pm

Edited: 18/08/2008 8:06pm


Although Rails has been leaning towards using the colon character to denote parameters, the official w3c specification for URLs is to use the / character to separate URL segments, and then use GET variables to denote page view options.

Also, using that approach would be confusing, as it departs from traditional file system approaches (the / and \ characters).

All other characters can be used in file names, and there comes the issue of distinguishing files from URLs. Also, I think google is actually based on the / character.

Adding extra characters to denote hierachy (e.g. page-sub-page) is a good temporary fix suggested by Sam, but its not appropriate IMO for a complete solution.

edit: subscribe

Matt Hardwick

Community Member, 61 Posts

4 September 2008 at 5:41am

The patch that is currently available doesn't work. Can we have some progress on this?



Community Member, 501 Posts

11 September 2008 at 8:06pm

Is that AJShort's patch?

It still added the -2 -3 when i tested it, but apart from that it worked well.

Really hope to see this included somehow in 2.3.

Matt Hardwick

Community Member, 61 Posts

13 September 2008 at 2:42pm

I am on about the patch here:

(the dev version hasn't been there for quite a while now)

I've tried patching that in to various daily builds, and the current "stable" release - but with no success.