> > ... The ap_hook_handler() call > > does not specify the handler key from the corresponding AddHandler > > configuration directive. As a consequence, the specified handler function > > must look at and accept or decline each request....
> > I'm looking at trace > > statements and my handler must reject PNG files and so forth... > > your handler needs to look at r->handler and decline stuff that you're > not supposed to handle Yeah, that's what I'm doing. It just seems odd that this step is necessary with response handlers but not with filters. It also seems inefficient, as now each handler in a particular directory is calling strcmp() against r->handler for a lot of files that don't apply (albeit there will only be a few handlers registered for any given directory). So my handler has to reject PNG files and so forth, which are obviously not matches as specified by directivies in httpd.conf. Seems like whatever mechanism is in place for filters could be used for response handlers. Symmetry, neh? But there's probably some rationale for this that hasn't surfaced yet. Some particular usage case that wouldn't be properly supported any other way. mma
