The multiple nested views functionality of the ui-router
is very nice - you can easily jump from one state of your app to another.
Sometimes you might want to change the URL, but sometimes not. I feel like the concept of state should be separate/optional from routing.
Here's a plunker that shows what I mean. This is a fork of one of the plunkers in the ui-router
documentation, with 2 minor changes noted below:
.state('route1', {
url: /route, // <---- URL IS SHARED WITH ROUTE2
views: {
viewA: {
template: route1.viewA
},
viewB: {
template: route1.viewB
}
}
})
.state('route2', {
url: /route, // <---- URL IS SHARED WITH ROUTE1
views: {
viewA: {
template: route2.viewA
},
viewB: {
template: route2.viewB
}
}
})
This seems to work - the URL stays the same. Again, how much redundant work is done here? Is this an approved/tested usage?
It would be nice if you could omit the url
from a state..
UPDATE: You can omit a url from a state. plunker
Update question: Is this an approved/tested usage?