The following reply was made to PR protocol/1014; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: Dean Gaudet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Ka-Ping Yee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: protocol/1014: Please, use Content-Location: header?
Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 09:53:47 -0700 (PDT)

 
 Emitting Content-Location for / -> /index.html is not desirable at all.
 Neither is emitting it for /foobar -> /foobar.cgi.  Those are not
 just time-saving internal redirects... those are methods of hiding
 implementation of your website.  For example, if you never tack .html onto
 your URLs and you use multiviews everywhere then you can later switch
 selected files to .shtml (SSI), .phtml (mod_php), or .cgi and none of your
 pages will need to be updated to reflect this chance.  None of your users
 will notice the change.
 
 Content-Location is not supported by at least Netscape because of the
 hassles of verifying the validity of the header.  The possibility for
 abuse is large.
 
 So it's unlikely we'll support it.
 
 You however are free to write a module that does it... it shouldn't be too
 hard.  Use a fixup handler and test if r->main != NULL then strcmp
 (r->uri, r->main->uri).  If they're different then a subrequest to a
 different object happened.  But you'll quickly discover that sometimes a
 subrequest does not have a URI.
 
 Dean
 
 

Reply via email to