Mailing-List: contact apache-docs-help@apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: apache-docs@apache.org
Date: Sat, 15 Sep 2001 23:54:42 -0400 (EDT)
From: Rich Bowen <rbowen@rcbowen.com>
To: <apache-docs@apache.org>
Subject: Re: Type-map files
In-Reply-To: <002501c13421$1f01eeb0$93c0b0d0@roweclan.net>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.33.0109152351370.31428-100000@rhiannon.rcbowen.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

On Sun, 2 Sep 2001, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:

> Yes, this is correct.  Also, note the following behavior.  If the user
> enables Multiviews, requests index.html, and creats an index.html.var file
> amoungst other index.html.xx variants, the index.html.var file _WILL_
> take precedence over the filename's extension parsing!
>
> They are no more required than multiple language versions.  However, you
> can note that parsing a .var file is far less CPU intensive than scanning
> for matching files.  Of course, if the system does _both_ (and hits a .var
> file while looking at all the Multiview variants) it can sometimes be more
> expensive.

Would it be desirable to add .var files to the documentation itself.
This would (in my mind anyway) have two effects. It would improve the
performance of sites serving Apache documentation, and it would provide
lots of examples of how to do .var files.

Or is this just one more thing to maintain, and one more thing to get
out of sync? I suppose if someone added a translation, and did not add
it to the .var file, someone would notice pretty quickly.

-- 
Rich Bowen - rbowen@rcbowen.com
... and another brother out of his mind, and another brother out at New
York (not the same, though it might appear so)
	Somebody's Luggage (Charles Dickens)


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: apache-docs-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: apache-docs-help@apache.org