httpd-docs mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Joshua Slive <jos...@slive.ca>
Subject Re: removed <br> in core.xml
Date Wed, 02 Jul 2003 18:47:17 GMT

On Wed, 2 Jul 2003, Astrid Ke├čler wrote:
> The directive quickreference is able to handle this. It uses the first
> line only and appends a + sign. Other formatings are able in the same
> way.

Absolutely; but why make each new transformation technique more
complicated than necessary?

> > Really, the <default> shouldn't contain anything at all other than exactly
> > what you need to put in the config file to get the default behavior.  In
> > cases like ErrorLog where the default is not so simple, we should probably
> > just eliminate the field and discuss it in the text.
>
> The overview box should give a _short_ overview. Long (more than one (?)
> line) descriptions are better placed in the text. So I tend to agree
> with you to replace long defaults, etc. with "see description". Only, I
> fear an inflation of "see description"s.

Yes, I think we all basically agree on this.  It is just a question of how
strict we want to be.  A couple points:

1. I'd just drop the field in this case, rather than using "see
description".

2. This is an area where we need to work with the developers to assure
that they don't overload the same directive for too many different uses.
This particular example (error_log/error.log) is an unfortunate historical
thing.  It really needs to be error.log on windows because of the
extension==type issue.  It could also be error.log on unix, except there
is too much history in the old name, so we need to live with it now.

Joshua.

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


Mime
View raw message