headers
Rodent of Unusual Size | 4 Aug 2005 05:45
Picon
Favicon

[STATUS] (httpd-docs-2.0) Wed Aug 3 23:45:48 2005

Apache HTTP Server 2.0 Documentation Status File.
Last modified: $Date: 2004-11-21 09:35:21 -0500 (Sun, 21 Nov 2004) $

For more information on how to contribute to the Apache Documentation
Project, please see http://httpd.apache.org/docs-project/

This document contains only documentation issues related to 2.0 alone.
For general documentation issues, or those that relate both to 2.0 and
to future versions, please see the same file in httpd-2.0 HEAD.
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
William A. Rowe, Jr. | 4 Aug 2005 08:13

Re: Auto-docs rewrite

At 04:08 PM 7/23/2005, André Malo wrote:
>* William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
>
>> To disambiguate these requests, would you consider...
>>
>> http://httpd.apache.org//directive
>> http://httpd.apache.org/query?directive
>
>// is equeivalent to / in URLs

Nak!!!  // is most definately a distinct location :)

You are reading the uri as a filesystem location; but in fact
the RFC doesn't consider // equivilant to /, otherwise the Location
directive would flatten such issues out of scope :)

>I'd consider query?directive not as that easy as it could be. Think of the 
>users that type them manually.

Yes, I'm thinking of manual entry; and i want something that is
clearly distinct from normal filesystem entries, for the sake of
various query, spiders, and caching approaches.

>> or something that doesn't imply that it's part of the normal content,
>> and something we can remove from robots?  (They will harvest these
>> anyways as part of crawling the true docs set.)
>
>R=301 will do, I guess.

Hows that?
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 3 comments |
headers
Gustavo Narea | 5 Aug 2005 01:39
Picon

howto/cgi.xml is going to be translated

Hello.

I'm going to translate howto/cgi.xml into spanish.

Saludos! ;-)

Gustavo Narea.
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
André Malo | 6 Aug 2005 11:53
Picon

Re: Auto-docs rewrite

* William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:

> Nak!!!  // is most definately a distinct location :)

Hmm.

> You are reading the uri as a filesystem location; but in fact
> the RFC doesn't consider // equivilant to /, otherwise the Location
> directive would flatten such issues out of scope :)

Actually it's other way 'round. // is not equal to / in file system 
locations (e.g. UNC paths). Further <Location>, Alias and whatnot work with 
squeezed slashes. <LocationMatch> is an exception, because of a backwards 
compat bug as stated in the docs. mod_rewrite is also an exception for some 
reason, but only in server context.

But you're right, that the RFC (1738) allows empty path segments - whatever 
this means. I'm sure I've read somewhere that // are equivalent to /. Can't 
remember, where. hrmpf. ;)

> >I'd consider query?directive not as that easy as it could be. Think of
> > the users that type them manually.
>
> Yes, I'm thinking of manual entry; and i want something that is
> clearly distinct from normal filesystem entries, for the sake of
> various query, spiders, and caching approaches.

HTTP doesn't know about file systems, so I'm wondering why a spider would 
care. URLs with query string are indexed as any other URL for a long time 
now.
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 2 comments |
headers
William A. Rowe, Jr. | 6 Aug 2005 17:37

Re: Auto-docs rewrite

At 04:53 AM 8/6/2005, André Malo wrote:
>> >I'd consider query?directive not as that easy as it could be. Think of
>> > the users that type them manually.
>>
>> Yes, I'm thinking of manual entry; and i want something that is
>> clearly distinct from normal filesystem entries, for the sake of
>> various query, spiders, and caching approaches.
>
>HTTP doesn't know about file systems, so I'm wondering why a spider would 
>care. URLs with query string are indexed as any other URL for a long time 
>now.

You seem to be missing my point; I don't want spiders crawling that
section, it will be lookup intensive.  If users google they can hit
the very same information from the normal pages.  

That said, obviously we can use robots.txt to exclude query* and be
done with it.  Not sure if all spiders would grok excluding //*.
We could certainly use /411/xxxx if that's quicker than /411?xxxx

Bill
Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |
headers
André Malo | 7 Aug 2005 10:26
Picon

Re: Auto-docs rewrite

* William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:

> At 04:53 AM 8/6/2005, André Malo wrote:
> >> >I'd consider query?directive not as that easy as it could be. Think
> >> > of the users that type them manually.
> >>
> >> Yes, I'm thinking of manual entry; and i want something that is
> >> clearly distinct from normal filesystem entries, for the sake of
> >> various query, spiders, and caching approaches.
> >
> >HTTP doesn't know about file systems, so I'm wondering why a spider
> > would care. URLs with query string are indexed as any other URL for a
> > long time now.
>
> You seem to be missing my point; I don't want spiders crawling that
> section, it will be lookup intensive.  If users google they can hit
> the very same information from the normal pages.

There is no section to crawl. The rules respond with redirects to the real 
documents. If someone sets a link to one of these recognized URLs and a 
spider follows it, then the redirect will be followed and nothing else 
happens. Where do you see a crawling problem? From outside view the 
redirects are not related to each other.

nd
--

-- 
s  s^saaaaaoaaaoaaaaooooaaoaaaomaaaa  a  alataa  aaoat  a  a
a maoaa a laoata  a  oia a o  a m a  o  alaoooat aaool aaoaa
matooololaaatoto  aaa o a  o ms;s;\s;s;g;y;s;:;s;y#mailto: #
 \51/\134\137| http://www.perlig.de #;print;# > nd <at> perlig.de
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Rodent of Unusual Size | 11 Aug 2005 05:45
Picon
Favicon

[STATUS] (httpd-docs-2.0) Wed Aug 10 23:45:53 2005

Apache HTTP Server 2.0 Documentation Status File.
Last modified: $Date: 2004-11-21 09:35:21 -0500 (Sun, 21 Nov 2004) $

For more information on how to contribute to the Apache Documentation
Project, please see http://httpd.apache.org/docs-project/

This document contains only documentation issues related to 2.0 alone.
For general documentation issues, or those that relate both to 2.0 and
to future versions, please see the same file in httpd-2.0 HEAD.
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Christian Eichert | 12 Aug 2005 10:32

Hello I'm new

Hello Astrid,
Hello Guys

I have realized that your custom error messages is very poor.

I whould like to translate some of your docs to romanian language
Please send me the materials you like me to translate.

I also speak hungarian.

regards
Chr. Eichert
Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |
headers
Rodent of Unusual Size | 18 Aug 2005 05:45
Picon
Favicon

[STATUS] (httpd-docs-2.0) Wed Aug 17 23:45:39 2005

Apache HTTP Server 2.0 Documentation Status File.
Last modified: $Date: 2004-11-21 09:35:21 -0500 (Sun, 21 Nov 2004) $

For more information on how to contribute to the Apache Documentation
Project, please see http://httpd.apache.org/docs-project/

This document contains only documentation issues related to 2.0 alone.
For general documentation issues, or those that relate both to 2.0 and
to future versions, please see the same file in httpd-2.0 HEAD.
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
William A. Rowe, Jr. | 19 Aug 2005 03:30

Re: Rolling 2.1.7 On Friday

docs <at> httpd'ers...

As Paul mentions below, on Friday (probably 1 a.m. ;-) he will
tag 2.1.7.  This is just a reminder to our most excellent doco
team that, once ack'ed - this becomes 2.1 beta, and then...
(drum roll please...) 2.2 GA(!)

So if you had changes to catch up with 2.1 that perhaps have
been sitting in your local checkouts, now is an excellent time
to commit the docs improvements.

Each release, we state "v x.x is the best available version
of Apache", and certainly the docs <at>  team has proven this!
When 2.2 final (not beta, not alpha) drops, we certainly all
want this to be true not only of the code, but also of the 
accompanying documentation!  And I trust you will make it so.

Yours,

Bill

p.s. it's been a while - have I told you all lately that 
you rock?!?

:)

At 12:43 AM 8/18/2005, Paul Querna wrote:
>Just a heads up, I am planning to RM and tag 2.1.7 (and re-branch from
>trunk the 2.2.x branch) on Friday or Saturday this week.  I intend to
>include APR and APR-Util 1.2.1 with this release.
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |

Gmane