On Dec 10, 2007, at 3:40 AM, Thorsten Scherler wrote:
I ended up with:
<!-- This will match all extension less requests -->
<map:match type="regexp" pattern="^[^.]+$">
<!-- This will match all requests having "/" on the end -->
<map:match type="regexp" pattern="^(.*)/$">
<map:match pattern="*/">
<map:redirect-to uri="../{1}.html" />
This is a browser redirect, so user will ultimately see .../foo.html
URL in the browser. In this case, why would you start with a URL
without extension? I does not make any sense. Just use URL with
extension from the beginning.
</map:match>
<map:match pattern="**/*/">
<map:redirect-to uri="../{2}.html" />
</map:match>
</map:match>
<map:match pattern="**/*">
<map:redirect-to uri="{2}.html" />
</map:match>
<map:match pattern="*">
<map:redirect-to uri="{1}.html" />
</map:match>
</map:match>
Regardless of comment above, what you got here is too verbose, you can
DRY it down using smarter match pattern. For example:
<map:match pattern="^(?:[^.\/]*\/)*([^.\/]+)\/$">
<map:redirect-to uri="../{1}.html"/>
</map:match>
<map:match pattern="^(?:[^.\/]*\/)*([^.\/]+)$">
<map:redirect-to uri="{1}.html"/>
</map:match>
One side effect is that the app is now way slower if you use
"extensionless requests". In our application we need the extensions to
trigger the correct pipelines, which I consider the normal usage of
cocoon. By redirecting the request one is causing more processing on
the
app which explains the higher response time.
You probably mean "more round trips". I don't see any extra processing
on the app.
Vadim
That makes me wonder whether extension less requests makes sense at
all
in a multi-output-format environment.
WDYT?
salu2
--
Thorsten Scherler
thorsten.at.apache.org
Open Source Java consulting, training and
solutions
