Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

SiteMap Diagnostic Utility #188

Open
NightOwl888 opened this issue Jul 29, 2013 · 5 comments
Open

SiteMap Diagnostic Utility #188

NightOwl888 opened this issue Jul 29, 2013 · 5 comments

Comments

@NightOwl888
Copy link
Collaborator

This idea came from https://github.com/waynebrantley in #119.

Implement an httpmodule that can be plugged in for development with url of sitemaps.axd. That would give a full diagnostic view of the tree and relationships.

Technically, I think it should be a regular view that uses routing similar to the way ELMAH works. It should also by default be available only on the local machine, but be configurable so it can use authentication to gain access.

@maartenba
Copy link
Owner

Perhaps something that plugs into Glimpse? http://getglimpse.com

@NightOwl888
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Perhaps something that plugs into Glimpse? http://getglimpse.com

Sounds like it might be an option. Keep the ideas coming.

@maartenba
Copy link
Owner

What is the data we want to see in the plugin? Current thinking:

  • List of sitemaps
  • Full tree for every site map

@Jogai
Copy link

Jogai commented Sep 6, 2013

Nice Idea! It reminds me of a module from attributerouting: http://attributerouting.net/#debugging

@NightOwl888
Copy link
Collaborator Author

What is the data we want to see in the plugin? Current thinking:

List of sitemaps
Full tree for every site map

I think that we should probably add current matching route and current matching node to the list (and the special cases when there is no match on route or node).

It should also be really easy to view the route data of each of the nodes in a list so it is easy to understand why your node isn't matching the incoming route. Perhaps we could even use percentages and color codes to show how close the node is to matching the current route in the list.

Nodes that are URL based should be represented differently so it is clear that they will never match a route, but can match the URL.

It should also be easy to tell if the node is not clickable.

This idea was born out of a little utility to determine what the current route looks like when typing the URL into the browser. http://haacked.com/archive/2008/03/13/url-routing-debugger.aspx/

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants