>Number: 3151 >Category: documentation >Synopsis: handler documentation refers to `documents ending in x' rather >than `documents with extension x' >Confidential: no >Severity: non-critical >Priority: medium >Responsible: apache >State: open >Class: doc-bug >Submitter-Id: apache >Arrival-Date: Mon Oct 5 19:10:01 PDT 1998 >Last-Modified: >Originator: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Organization: apache >Release: 1.3 >Environment: 1.3.1, BSDI 3.1 et al. >Description: after reviewing some previous PRs, i now undersand why apache handles files with names like foo.map.gif the way it does. however, the documentation confuses the issue. the mod_mime documentation provides some insight into the way the documentation uses the term `extension', but somebody just looking at (say) http://www.apache.org/docs/handler.html might be confused by stuff like:
>How-To-Repeat: >Fix: >Audit-Trail: >Unformatted: [In order for any reply to be added to the PR database, ] [you need to include <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> in the Cc line ] [and leave the subject line UNCHANGED. This is not done] [automatically because of the potential for mail loops. ] [If you do not include this Cc, your reply may be ig- ] [nored unless you are responding to an explicit request ] [from a developer. ] [Reply only with text; DO NOT SEND ATTACHMENTS! ] >AddHandler maps the filename extension extension to the handler handler-name. >For example, to activate CGI scripts with the file extension ".cgi", you might >use: > > AddHandler cgi-script cgi > >Once that has been put into your srm.conf or httpd.conf file, any file ending >with ".cgi" will be treated as a CGI program. although strictly true, this confuses the issue, because actually that statement makes any file whose name contains `.cgi' to the right of zero or more recognized extensions be treated as a CGI. more accurate documentation here and other places where the documentation talks about `files ending in x' would reduce the likelihood that the naive user will be confused by apache's belief in multiple extensions.
