DOC Nested RequestHandlers

[emteknetnz]

Issue #401

Linting errors appear invalid, seem like linter rules need to be relaxed

[GuySartorelli]

This first review is just about the markdown linting - all of the failures were valid. Here's how you should resolve them:

[emteknetnz]

@GuySartorelli Have updated. I really dislike the php namespace requirements linting, I don't want to add an empty namespace to the code examples because its unnecessary and will indent the examples. While I could add an arbitary namespace it might not match what someones project has. Can we simply disable that rule in the linter?

[GuySartorelli]

I really dislike the php namespace requirements linting, I don't want to add an empty namespace to the code examples

Do not use empty namespaces, unless the example explicitly is for the Page or PageController classes which we have included in recipes.

For everything else, a real namespace should be used (e.g. App\Model for models, App\Control for controllers, App\Extension for extensions, etc etc)

While I could add an arbitary namespace it might not match what someones project has

These are examples, which show best practice. People can use whatever namespace they want. They don't have to match the examples. They might name the classes or methods something else too - but we still have class names and method names in examples.

I still see people not using namespaces in their projects, and part of the reason seems to be that almost none of our examples have had namespaces until very recently. Documentation that shows best practice is more likely to lead to people using best practice in their own projects.

[GuySartorelli]

Please rebase so the php linting passes

[emteknetnz]

Done

[GuySartorelli]

LGTM