Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-apache-docs-archive@apache.org Received: (qmail 48757 invoked by uid 500); 20 Aug 2001 16:04:17 -0000 Mailing-List: contact apache-docs-help@apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk list-help: list-unsubscribe: list-post: Reply-To: apache-docs@apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list apache-docs@apache.org Received: (qmail 48725 invoked from network); 20 Aug 2001 16:04:16 -0000 Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2001 09:04:17 -0700 (PDT) From: Joshua Slive X-X-Sender: To: cc: Subject: Re: cvs commit: httpd-2.0/docs/docroot/error/images - New directory In-Reply-To: <033f01c12935$63839da0$95c0b0d0@roweclan.net> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Spam-Rating: h31.sny.collab.net 1.6.2 0/1000/N On Mon, 20 Aug 2001, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: > If we take a close look at Roy's new schema, and the intent of this page, > and how Icons and other server-wide stuff is installed, I think these aught > to reside in httpd-2.0/docs/error/ > > They aught to be installed to @@serverroot@@/error/ +1 > > But because I'm building a 'composite negotation typemap/content' method, where > the new sytnax will be; > > Content-mechanism: values > Body:end-tag >

This is actual content

> end-tag > > I'm suggesting we leave the contribution where it is, and build these composite-ed > type-map/content files right into httpd-2.0/docs/error/. > > Would this be acceptable to everyone? I'm slightly skeptical about the usefulness of this new typemap thingy. Is the point of this just to save a bunch of "stat" calls? I guess I could be convinced, but it seems less clean to me. Joshua. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: apache-docs-unsubscribe@apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: apache-docs-help@apache.org