Hi Sean and Thierry, I think that the FileRepresentation's Javadocs should have been slightly more explicit for this constructor. I have just clarified it and also made it smarter: now both file URIs and usual path names are supported. If your path attribute starts with "file://" then we rely on LocalReference to resolve the actual File (fails fast too).
Also, we need to use an URI in Directory because files can be served either directly from the file system (URIs starting by file://) or from the classloader (URIs starting by clap://) or from a WAR (URIs starting by war://). See updated Directory Javadocs for details. Best regards, Jerome > -----Message d'origine----- > De : Thierry Boileau [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Envoyé : mercredi 24 janvier 2007 18:51 > À : [email protected] > Objet : Re: Problem with multiple virtual hosts > > > > I don't intend to make any excuses for my inability to read > JavaDoc correctly, > > but this does beg a question. Should Directory and > FileRepresentation > > constructors be consistent since they are dealing with > similar things. > > Should they both take a URI or should they both take a File/path? > > > I agree with you Sean. I made the same mistake at the beginning. > In my opinion, I prefer using a File and/or path than using a URI. > What do you think about Jérôme? > > Thierry
