Mailing-List: contact users-help@httpd.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: users@httpd.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of
 aleksandersen+apache.org@runbox.com designates 193.71.199.94 as permitted
 sender)
From: Daniel Aleksandersen <aleksandersen+apache.org@runbox.com>
To: users@httpd.apache.org
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2008 23:03:45 +0100
User-Agent: KMail/1.9.7
References: <200803112054.38859.aleksandersen+apache.org@runbox.com>
 <200803112124.28818.aleksandersen+apache.org@runbox.com>
 <47D6F03F.3000804@rowe-clan.net>
In-Reply-To: <47D6F03F.3000804@rowe-clan.net>
Jabber-ID: aleksandersen@jabber.no
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-Id: <200803112303.45507.aleksandersen+apache.org@runbox.com>
Subject: [users@httpd] Readable and L10N URIs with content negotiation and
 mod_rewrite/aliases

On 2008-03-11, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
> Daniel Aleksandersen wrote:
> > On 2008-03-11, Dragon wrote:
> >> Daniel Aleksandersen wrote:
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> I need some help to think clearer.
> >>>
> >>> To copy the example used on =C3=A2=E2=82=AC=C5=93Making readable URIs=
=C3=A2=E2=82=AC=C2=9D at W3C:
> >>> =C3=A2=E2=82=AC=C5=93A Norwegian without knowledge of basic English w=
ould like to be
> >>> able to remember "www.site.com/fiske/stenger" instead
> >>> of "www.site.com/fishing/rods".=C3=A2=E2=82=AC=C2=9D
> >>>
> >>> What I am wondering about is how I would go about rewriting the
> >>> URIs in Apache to allow for content negotiation at these two URIs.
> >>> If a Norwegian requests =C3=A2=E2=82=AC=CB=9Cwww.site.com/fishing/rod=
s=C3=A2=E2=82=AC=E2=84=A2, he should
> >>> get redirected to the Norwegian URI and served the Norwegian
> >>> document. Say the location of the two versions is
> >>> "/fishingrods.html.en and fishingrods.html.nb.
> >>
> >> ---------------- End original message. ---------------------
> >>
> >> But what if a person with a non-English language
> >> preference actually wants to view the English version?
> >
> > Then the user would click the link to get a cookie that would
> > override the transparent content negotiation process. The idea of
> > content negotiation is to suggest the best possible version
> > automatically.
>
> See the httpd 2.2 conf/extra/httpd-manual.conf for how this is
> rewritten to be in a specific language-space.  (en/index.html vs
> no/index.html)
>
> Now, if you want 12 different 'file names' for the same document, they
> really can't be negotiated using conventional accept semantics because
> foo.html(.en) ~=3D foo.html(.no) while foo.html(.en) is entirely
> unrelated (in a uri-sense) to bar.html(.no).
>
> You can do it - I suggest rewrite map db's, but you'll be at this a
> while, and likely create yourself a maintenance headache.

So what is really the best practise? I thought of content negotiation as=20
trying to always serve the most appropriate version for all URIs, if not=20
especially told otherwise (by a direct link or cookie override).=20

Should I only use language focused content negotiation on the welcome=20
page/the index?
=2D-=20
Daniel Aleksandersen

---------------------------------------------------------------------
The official User-To-User support forum of the Apache HTTP Server Project.
See <URL:http://httpd.apache.org/userslist.html> for more info.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
   "   from the digest: users-digest-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@httpd.apache.org