httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jeff Trawick <trawi...@bellsouth.net>
Subject Re: [PATCH] filtering and canned error responses
Date Fri, 01 Sep 2000 20:30:52 GMT
rbb@covalent.net writes:

> I disagree with this.  Sorry for not speaking up before.  I have been very
> busy, and I have had many other things on my mind.  All text needs to be
> passed through all filters.  Think about the canned errors generated by
> mistakes in SSIs.  Those are part of the document, and should be processed
> by the rest of the filters in the chain.  None of our canned errors should
> cause any filter to modify data, because they don't have any tags in them,
> but that doesn't mean that somebody who write mod_mumblefoo, won't want
> their filter to put the current date in the error using SSI tags.

I disagree completely with the premise that all filters act on tags in
a fashion similar to mod_include.  That is a debilitating requirement.
Certain filters can work that way and certain ones can't.  It is
better to disallow filtering on the error strings than to require that
filters sanity-check their input data (not all filters can even do
that).  (Besides, the less code between an error message and the
network the better...  Sending an error message should be a relatively
simple.)

If the administrator wants filter processing on an error document she
can use a redirect, so there is no big loss here.

I'm not sure I understand "canned errors generated by mistakes in
SSIs."  Are you talking about a failed subrequest?

-- 
Jeff Trawick | trawick@ibm.net | PGP public key at web site:
     http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Park/9289/
          Born in Roswell... married an alien...

Mime
View raw message