Hi. Thank you for your response. You are not missing the point of my questions. But I do not really have control over the requests. Or rather, I do, but there are hundreds of pages containing hundreds of similar (but not equal) links, and it is in the practice not doable to edit them all.. And my "mangle.pl" URI was an oversimplification for the sake of this post. The real URI for that first frame is more complicated to generate, and beyond what I can do with mod_rewrite et al. But second, I just realised that I cannot do things the way I explain below anyway, because inside a tag, you cannot put content. You can only use . So basically, my skeleton ResponseHandler works as I expected and does create the document that I wanted and returns it, but that document is invalid html. Shucks. Back to the drawing board. Which now creates another issue : I could create instead a document like : but.. the URI of the request for the second frame would trigger my ResponseHandler again, and I'd be stuck in a forever-loop of embedded frames, fractal-like. So now I am going to re-read your suggestions below, and see if I can figure out something along those lines which does not force me to edit and/or rename all the pages. Maybe instead of generating the second frame as I can instead generate it as and then detect this in the Handler, change the $r->uri back to the correct one, and let Apache's default handler serve it by returning DECLINED. I'll try that. Thanks for helping me think. gAzZaLi wrote: > > Q1: At first glance, using a mod_perl handler to serve an existing > static html file seems like overkill. > > Couldn't Apache respond (RedirectMatch?) with a common frameset html > file with some Javascript, which then fills the first frame with the > response to mangle.pl and the second frame with the static html file? > > If you have control over the creation of the request URLs, you could > also have them come in as say, "show.html?ghi", which will be a frameset > html file which works as above and not have Apache do any extra work. > > In each case, your mod_perl handler would be simpler and deal only with > responding to the value of arg. > > Of course you may have already considered and rejected these ideas and > I'm missing the point entirely. > > > On 11/12/2012 9:19 AM, André Warnier wrote: >> Hi. >> >> context: Apache2.x, mod_perl 2.x >> >> In response to some request URLs, I have to compose a response >> structured as follows : >> >> - a html frameset document with two frames >> - in the 1st frame, the result of another HTTP request to the same >> Apache server. >> This URI of this HTTP request is created by "mangling" the original >> request URL somewhat. >> - in the 2d frame, the content of the HTML file corresponding to the >> original request URI. >> >> For example, if the original request URI was something like : >> "/abc/def/ghi.html", then >> - the top frame should contain the (html) output of a request to >> "/cgi-bin/mangle.pl?arg=ghi" >> - the bottom frame should contain the content of the >> originally-requested "/abc/def/ghi.html" URI (which is a static file). >> >> I am thinking of doing this by : >> - creating a mod_perl ResponseHandler >> - having this response handler make a first sub-request to the >> "/cgi-bin/mangle.pl?arg=ghi" URI, grabbing the content of the response >> to that sub-request, and insert it into the first of the output >> document. >> - having the response handler do a lookup_uri of the original URI, get >> the resulting filename, reading the file and insert its content into the >> second of the output document. >> >> My 1st question is : is the above a valid plan, or is there something >> fundamentally wrong with this approach ? >> >> My 2d question is : looking at the Apache2::SubRequest documentation, I >> do not see a clear way of getting the response content of a subrequest. >> For example, the run() method explanation seems to indicate that the >> response content is sent directly to the client. >> Am I missing something ? >> >> TIA >> >> >> > >