Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-xml-cocoon-dev-archive@xml.apache.org Received: (qmail 93110 invoked by uid 500); 6 Dec 2002 00:10:33 -0000 Mailing-List: contact cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk list-help: list-unsubscribe: list-post: Reply-To: cocoon-dev@xml.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list cocoon-dev@xml.apache.org Received: (qmail 93097 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2002 00:10:32 -0000 Sender: sam Message-ID: <3DEFECC1.D675E227@atnet.net.au> Date: Fri, 06 Dec 2002 10:18:09 +1000 From: sam Organization: Golden Orb Technologies X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.4.18 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: cocoon-dev@xml.apache.org Subject: Re: ResourceReader and pdf References: <3DEDC2ED.3050703@gmx.de> <3DEE6C9E.2050701@yahoo.de> <3DEEA542.5000209@gmx.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N Hi folks, we had similar problems with using ResourceReader with serving static PDF and flash (SWF) on both versions 2.0.1 and the 2.1-dev cvs that we are now experimenting with. At the time, as far as I could tell this was because of IE5+ have broken support for the Vary header, which is output by Tomcat in this instance. Apache doesn't do this for static PDFs and SWFs so it is not a problem if served statically from there. In our environment, we use Apache and connect this to Tomcat with mod/jk2. Because we want to protect the documents with our servlet based security mechanism, we had to host these on Tomcat. I found using the following browsermatch directives in apache httpd.conf will stop the strange behaviours with these binary file types: --snip--- . . . BrowserMatch "Mozilla/2" nokeepalive BrowserMatch "MSIE [1-4]" nokeepalive ssl-unclean-shutdown downgrade-1.0 force-response-1.0 force-no-vary BrowserMatch "MSIE [5-9]" ssl-unclean-shutdown force-no-vary . . . --snip--- good luck, Sam Joerg Heinicke wrote: > >> We have the same problem with Cocoon 2.0.1. Do you have a current > >> version? First tests with 2.0.3 were okay, even if the code, you > >> mention, has not changed. But maybe the tests only were okay by accident? > > > > Maybe. AFAIK the dependency on the correct content length > > for displaying PDF is a IEx specific problem, other browsers > > may work without it. > > The people, who tested it, said, that it was not the IE problem, but > browser independent. And the download in the different browsers gave > different file sizes at the end. > We deliver the PDFs now simply via Apache, no Cocoon. > > Joerg > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: cocoon-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org > For additional commands, email: cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: cocoon-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org For additional commands, email: cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org