httpd-docs mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "William A. Rowe, Jr." <>
Subject Re: httpd-docs-2.0/manual/
Date Wed, 17 Jan 2001 14:11:47 GMT
From: "Rodent of Unusual Size" <Ken.Coar@Golux.Com>
Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2001 7:46 AM

> "William A. Rowe, Jr." wrote:
> > 
> > When we began, we should have begun using  Yes,
> > I know the side effects, and if we must program around them, we
> > should start.
> I disagree.  Strongly.
> > It would be good to be able to specify,, or
> > and come up with the same page.  But the final suffix
> > should be the final word on the mime type, not the encoding.
> I also disagree -- strongly -- with this sentiment.  The
> extensions *should* be order-independent.  Currently they
> are; you're advocating that they be made order-dependent,
> which I consider a giant step back.

Ahhh, agreement :-)>

--Apache-- should treat such things as order-independent!  I concur 100%!

The issue isn't -with- Apache, it's with how legible or usable our doc
files are in the absense of Apache.  Most clients in the world at this
moment don't figure out what an file is without coaching
(open the browser, open the document, and ahhh, it's a web page.)  This
specific group (along with email transports and others) would recognize without any complaints and open a browser window for them.

It's all mute anyways.  With the current schema, they couldn't click a
single hyperlink without coming to a dead end.  So I guess that's the
value of discussing this further :-(

View raw message