> It always bothers me that foo/bar/ files need a foo/bar.html in front of them,
> rather than a foo/bar/index.html, as is (to my mind) traditional.
>
+> Ethan
+>
+> Hmm, now I've had time to think about this, and this does conflict pretty hard with foo.html/Discussion
+> pages. Well, back to the drawing board.
+>
+> Well, it seems unlikely that you'll have both foo/bar.html and foo/bar/index.html,
+> so why not accept either as foo/bar? This would both preserve backwards
+> compatibility, as well as allow foo/bar/Discussion.
+>
+> Ethan
+>
+> No, in order for this to work, the wiki path foo/bar/baz could be any of:
+>
+> * foo/bar/baz.html
+> * foo/index/bar/index/baz.html
+> * foo/bar/index/baz.html
+> * foo/bar/index/baz/index.html
+>
+> Or many others. Which is probably even hackier than having both foo.html and foo/.
+>
> Ethan
\ No newline at end of file