Setting up openehr.cl dns

openEHR.org Website (archive)
1

Hi George,

That is what I thought.

In which case, www.openehr.org will be synonomous with www.openehr.cl. And can be ignored in the discussions about URLs for Daisy.

The way Daisy works is that each 'site' has a top level directory, which is used in the URL. Only one of those directories can be rewritten by the Apache front end to remove the directory.

So, /openehr/ is rewritten so that all public URLs appear as /.

However, any other sites in Daisy will require their full URL to be used, so /chile/ or whatever, will remain in the public URLs.

I think the web-group needs to have a debate about the naming of alternative Daisy sites.

George Hayworth wrote:

2

Hi All,

Whilst we should discuss the possible solutions to this, I feel I should sound a note of caution. Any solution that requires 'hiding' or 'rewriting' URLs into the Daisy namespace is complicated and will require a significant amount of my time. Time that I do not have to give to openEHR at the moment. I spent nearly 2 whole weeks exclusively working on the new openEHR web site recently, this was to the detriment of the work that I get paid to do. That work now has to take priority.

That said I still want to contribute to the discussion, to ensure any agreed solution is supportable.

The Apache rewrites we put into place to get the openehr.org site working, with the URLs hiding the Daisy namespace structure are complicated and fragile. And there are still some aspects of Daisy that do not work properly via this mechanism. Adding more sites, with the requirement of hiding the Daisy namespace is going to add to the complexity, fagileness and have an impact on maintainability.

Daisy is designed so that namspaces are determined by the top level directory in the URL. All the solutions shown in the Daisy docs and Wiki assume that this is the case, and there will be a single site that has that hidden, with all others showing the top level directory.

I can think of a possible way that openehr.cl could work, by setting up another virtual server for that site. But this would need to be setup, tested and any maintainability issues considered. We would also need to consider the scalability of this solution, if and when other country/language versions are required.

Another possibility (and one that I think is more supportable) is that we rewrite openehr.cl/ to be openehr.cl/es-cl/ as a single rewrite, but all other URLs have the '/es-cl' directory exposed. This would only require a single rewrite in Apache and would work better with the Daisy srtuctures.

It seems to me that we are constantly trying to 'fight' against the basic organisational structure that Daisy is designed to work with. That is always going to cause problems. The openEHR community needs to accept that this is part of the solution that was chosen and start working with it.

At this stage I feel I must say that I am not defending Daisy, I was not involved in the original decision and I am currently neutral about the technology.

Sergio Carmona wrote:

3

Anthony Peacock said the following on 20/11/07 09:17:

The Apache rewrites we put into place to get the openehr.org site working, with the URLs hiding the Daisy namespace structure are complicated and fragile. And there are still some aspects of Daisy that do not work properly via this mechanism. Adding more sites, with the requirement of hiding the Daisy namespace is going to add to the complexity, fagileness and have an impact on maintainability.

I agree with Anthony, that's why I started off with the sitename discussion.

As far as I know, current implementations of multi-lingual sites in Daisy all assume a single site, i.e. the layout and graphics stay the same. What we are trying to accomplish here would be a first.

I agree that fighting the Daisy way of things is counterproductive and results in fragile solutions. Let's focus on its advantages and use them to get the information online.

Bye, Helma

4

Helma/Anthony,
         I don't think we should fight it either if it is going to cause grief. So how do the South Americans access their particular country home page for Chile. What is the url that we must use to see the Chilean/Spanish site?
regards
George

hepabolu wrote:

5

George Hayworth said the following on 20/11/07 12:37:

Helma/Anthony,
        I don't think we should fight it either if it is going to cause grief. So how do the South Americans access their particular country home page for Chile. What is the url that we must use to see the Chilean/Spanish site?

My suggestion, based on what I've seen suggested here before: www.openehr.cl/es-cl/

As far as I know, current implementations of multi-lingual sites in Daisy all assume a single site, i.e. the layout and graphics stay the same. What we are trying to accomplish here would be a first.

Correction: they all assume a single DOMAIN NAME, they can still use different Daisy site which also show up as www.domain.org/en/, www.domain.org/fr/ etc.

Bye, Helma

6

Anthony Peacock wrote:

It seems to me that we are constantly trying to 'fight' against the
basic organisational structure that Daisy is designed to work with.
That is always going to cause problems.

as it does with any tool

The openEHR community needs to accept that this is part of the
solution that was chosen and start working with it.

yes, or we may have to change sooner than we thought. Daisy isn't
designed to provide the kind of URI space we expected (I am beginning to
wonder if the designers even thought about URIs at all), and it is our
fault for not doing sufficient research on it I guess, before using it.
But for the moment, I think we will have to live with some compromises
on the other country sites by the sound of it. I am not happy with that,
but I am much more unhappy if Anthony or any of us have to engage in
hacking (of URLs, Apache rules, software, etc) to essentially circumvent
the design principles of the tool in question - which in my experience
always causes more problems than it solves. So as far as I am concerned,
I think Anthony needs to have the veto over any proposals that affect
Apache, rewriting, or any other thing outside of Daisy proper.

- thomas

7

Hi Tom,

Thomas Beale wrote:

Anthony Peacock wrote:

It seems to me that we are constantly trying to 'fight' against the basic organisational structure that Daisy is designed to work with. That is always going to cause problems.

as it does with any tool

Agreed.

The openEHR community needs to accept that this is part of the solution that was chosen and start working with it.

yes, or we may have to change sooner than we thought. Daisy isn't designed to provide the kind of URI space we expected (I am beginning to wonder if the designers even thought about URIs at all), and it is our fault for not doing sufficient research on it I guess, before using it.

In hind sight a little more work up front would have helped. We would have at least understood the issues earlier.

But for the moment, I think we will have to live with some compromises on the other country sites by the sound of it. I am not happy with that, but I am much more unhappy if Anthony or any of us have to engage in hacking (of URLs, Apache rules, software, etc) to essentially circumvent the design principles of the tool in question - which in my experience always causes more problems than it solves. So as far as I am concerned, I think Anthony needs to have the veto over any proposals that affect Apache, rewriting, or any other thing outside of Daisy proper.

Agreed!

I wasn't after a veto :slight_smile:

All I wanted to do was place a marker against any expectations that a solution, that everybody is happy with, may not be something that can be achieved quickly. And to suggest that we may need to make some compromises.

8

Hi,

Anthony Peacock wrote:

Hi Tom,

Thomas Beale wrote:

Anthony Peacock wrote:

It seems to me that we are constantly trying to 'fight' against the basic organisational structure that Daisy is designed to work with. That is always going to cause problems.

as it does with any tool

Agreed.

The openEHR community needs to accept that this is part of the solution that was chosen and start working with it.

yes, or we may have to change sooner than we thought. Daisy isn't designed to provide the kind of URI space we expected (I am beginning to wonder if the designers even thought about URIs at all), and it is our fault for not doing sufficient research on it I guess, before using it.

In hind sight a little more work up front would have helped. We would have at least understood the issues earlier.

But for the moment, I think we will have to live with some compromises on the other country sites by the sound of it. I am not happy with that, but I am much more unhappy if Anthony or any of us have to engage in hacking (of URLs, Apache rules, software, etc) to essentially circumvent the design principles of the tool in question - which in my experience always causes more problems than it solves. So as far as I am concerned, I think Anthony needs to have the veto over any proposals that affect Apache, rewriting, or any other thing outside of Daisy proper.

Agreed!

I wasn't after a veto :slight_smile:

All I wanted to do was place a marker against any expectations that a solution, that everybody is happy with, may not be something that can be achieved quickly. And to suggest that we may need to make some compromises.

PS. I also wasn't suggesting that we look at alternative solutions.

9

Anthony Peacock wrote:

PS. I also wasn't suggesting that we look at alternative solutions.

no but I am starting to think about it...

- thomas

10

Hi all, I understand what Anthony and Helma explain,and I also agree, to have es-cl showing or not is a little issue.
Did I understand correctly or you mentioned that changing the header image and left menu to a “chilean version” would also be complicated?
I will continue translating the pages, and once again I appreciate you’re all taking the time to help us with this.

Sergio

2007/11/20, Thomas Beale < thomas.beale@oceaninformatics.com>:

11

Sergio Carmona said the following on 20/11/07 23:39:

Hi all, I understand what Anthony and Helma explain,and I also agree, to
have es-cl showing or not is a little issue.
Did I understand correctly or you mentioned that changing the header
image and left menu to a "chilean version" would also be complicated?

No it is not. I just want to be cautious now that openehr is live, so
I'll prepare it offline on my local version and then upload the site and
skin when ready.

I will continue translating the pages, and once again I appreciate
you're all taking the time to help us with this.

Thank you and please continue the translation work, it will make the
openehr website even more valuable in terms of available information.

Bye, Helma

12

thanks helma, I’ll be in touch, please let me know as soon as you’re ready to insert the image and modify the menu.

Sergio

2007/11/21, hepabolu < hepabolu@gmail.com>: