Update slash_in_parameter.rst

[SamanShafigh]

"name" in requirements is confusing, I had problem for doing the same and then after 2 days I found that the "name" should be same as the parameter, it is not part of symfony config

requirements:
name: .+

[xabbuh]

@SamanShafigh Thank you for improving the documentation. However, I'm mixed on this. What do others think? Is the name name really confusing? Anyway, I would then prefer to write username instead of userName.

@weaverryan Should then be merged into 2.3.

[wouterj]

@SamanShafigh what exactly did you find confusing about "name" and how does "username" solve that? (I don't really follow you, so I would like to know more to see if we can fix it)

[SamanShafigh]

Hi,

Thanks for the response,

The problem for the 'name' is that one might think that the "name" in this
line "requirements: name: .+" is part of the symphony rout configs. For
example I did this and I had a problem for several days

cms_show_page:
path: /page/{pageUrl}
defaults: { _controller: SamanCmsBundle:Page:index }
requirements:
name: .+

and then after many searches I found that it should be

cms_show_page:
path: /page/{pageUrl}
defaults: { _controller: SamanCmsBundle:Page:index }
requirements:
pageUrl: .+

On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 9:15 PM, Wouter J [email protected] wrote:

@SamanShafigh https://github.com/SamanShafigh what exactly did you find
confusing about "name" and how does "username" solve that? (I don't really
follow you, so I would like to know more to see if we can fix it)

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#4307 (comment).

[xabbuh]

I'm not sure if many people struggle with this. But I can see that you might misunderstand that name good be a generic identifier in the routing context. Changing name to username would indeed make this absolutely clear. I don't mind if we change it here since it doesn't hurt. So, if it helps people to understand the example, I'd say let's go for it. Let's see what the others think about this.

[wouterj]

Ah, so you thought name was some sort of name of the route? I can see how it can be confusing (and wow, thanks for your feedback. This are things we really need feedback from our users, just like you did).

However, can you please change this PR to use username instead of userName? Then we're consistent with the rest of the documentation.

[SamanShafigh]

Hi,

Thanks for the update, Sure I will change it to username

Best

Saman

On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 7:39 PM, Wouter J [email protected] wrote:

Ah, so you thought name was some sort of name of the route? I can see how
it can be confusing (and wow, thanks for your feedback. This are things we
really need feedback from our users, just like you did).

However, can you please change this PR to use username instead of userName?
Then we're consistent with the rest of the documentation.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#4307 (comment).

[wouterj]

Thanks for starting this, @SamanShafigh. I've made the final changes and created a new PR: #4400