A page name should be just another attribute. It really is that simple.
Pages already have unique ids that can be used in the URL, in fact, we only share those URLs anyway, in order to prevent links breaking when the title changes.
So why is it so difficult to use uniqueIds in URLs, and append the page name if you really want to?
Something along the lines of amazon URLs:
Those two links are taking you to the same page.
Right now the Confluence URLs is https://<confluence>/display/<space>/<page-name>
And the share URL is https://<confluence>/x/<page-id>
Why not use https://<confluence>/display/<space>/<page-id>/<page-name> for the display URL and solve everyones problems?
Is this really that hard to do?
2022 and not allowing same name pages within a space still sounds like a bad idea except for saving money on paying the tech debt.
Especially since now the URLs should not be an issue anymore as in a link like:
One can change the string after the last slash or even completely delete it and the URL still points to the correct page.
Has this changed recently? Is Atlassian finally moving towards patching this bug?
The Atlassian team chooses to gaslight here over admitting there is a real problem and viable solution.
Instead of "Let's think about what our customers want" the answer is "that's too hard of a problem, and our schema is too rigid to be compatible, so let's pretend it's a feature, not a bug".
They seem to actually believe their pretending though.
The case is closed; your better option for a solution to this problem is to look elsewhere --- Notion, and the dozen others that will eat their lunch over the next ~10 years.
There are so many things about Confluence where their solution is "Go purchase something from a 3rd party developer in our marketplace because we choose not to solve that most basic problem".
This has been asked numerous times before:
Its not possible, you can dig deeper in the threads as to why its technically not possible.
@Laurens Coppens: Both of those have comments closed. This, firstly, is ridiculous. Things change, technologies change, solutions may appear. Shutting the door like that is rather disrespectful to the users.
Also, how is it not possible when there is a pluging for it: https://marketplace.atlassian.com/apps/1219390/duplicate-page-titles-same-page-titles Thus, clearly, it is possible.
@Monique Khairuliana I don't understand your comment? I also disagree with the given explanation.
Maybe more effort should be focused on satisfying customers, rather than shutting them up. Just a thought...
@Monique Khairuliana thanks for adding the link to the feature request
I understand your frustration, i've had the same one in the past, but i think the explanation in the feature request is clear and the decision has been made and we need to accept this.
I have always used a work around by adding a prefix or suffix and this always came in handy when using the search.
You don't want to find 50 pages with the title "budget" without any further details.
And sometimes you just need to break it up in multiple spaces instead of just all in one.
Its all about content management using the features embedded in the product you or your company has chosen.
I don't agree with the statement, it is possible because a plugin vendor has done it.
Addons like that can have impact on standard macros, can do ad hoc rewrites when loading te page causing degraded performance, ...
The fact that atlassian chose not to implement a feature with that many votes and a lifetime of multiple years means its not easy to implement and has impact on to many levels.
"You don't want to find 50 pages with the title "budget" without any further details." - There's already space name and creation time, as well as an excerpt, listed - so adding page parent is no big deal.
The only impact comes from depending on the URL or page name, which is the root mistake that should be fixed regardless of this request. There already is such a thing as the page id - the share link. It is unique per page and should be the only thing that any macro depends on.
The page name should be treated as just another attribute.
That's a very bad architecture, otherwise.
Apologies for bringing up an old thread here.
I know it is not technically possible to have duplicate page names within a space. As I understand it there is no strenuous naming convention other than the page names cannot be the exact same. With that being said, is there any known or possible way to automate the process of creating unique page names? This is mainly to pertain to the use of templates, for example if I were to create a specific template to keep track of funding requests for projects titled "Funding Request," would would it be possible to have confluence automatically create a the page with a title that is differentiated to prevent page duplication? Or is the only option to have the page title populated as "Funding Request" within the template and have the user accessing it add something to make the title unique?
Additionally, if I were to make the template available to users in a completely separate space, am I correct in saying that if they were to use the template to create a Funding Request page, it would not clash with a page of the same name in another space? I see the only worry in that instance being that a search for Funding request would pull hits from multiple spaces.
I'm not sure if I would agree with calling something a waste of money when it obviously isn't part of the framework and solves your problem, regardless of your own personal expectations and wishes. I don't think the app is expensive and if you're not sure about whether it solves your problem you can always make use of a trial first.
In general having an ecosystem that allows you to get more functionality and solve problems that are not / can not be solved by Atlassian should be seen as a very positive thing, not a bad thing. :)
I can only keep repeating myself: it's a waste money on something that should be part of the framework.
Well, I'm glad that you don't think $3000 is expensive, but feel free to convince my managers to pay for it. (and that's even before the fact that the app is not even available for our Data Center deployment)
Plus, obviously the problem is much deeper than just page names, which means this app might break something. @Laurens Coppens hinted as much.
Thus, payed app is not an option.