* André Malo wrote:
> * Vincent Bray wrote: > > While I'm on a bit of a roll, I'll mention that subject that strikes > > fear in to the hearts of intrepid geeks, mod_rewrite and its docs. > > > > http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42898 > > > > The url in the PR is for 1.3 but trunk has the same issue. > > > > What's the correct term for the bit of the request that RewriteRule's > > first argument interogates (or mutilates, in many cases)? I think it's > > "URI reference" but there's also "URL path" which is rather ambiguous. > > The docs go on to demonstrate in detail what happens with examples, > > but I think there could still be an improvement on the term. > > Well...... it's not entirely true. It actually matches both. In contrast > to popular belief the particular word to mind here is "current". Within a > given set, mod_rewrite matches the current value of r->uri or > r->filename, I think (depending on server vs. directory context) > (possibly preparing it before starting matching). It is true that it > *starts* with the URL path. But it continues with the replacement, > whatever it is, so: (except the query string, of course) > > RewriteRule foo http://bar/baz > > writes http://bar/baz into r->something and this is what's going to be > matched next time. The automatic redirect is detected after the last rule > of the set (which may rewrite it to something else, so the automatic > redirect won't happen anymore). Note that some flags even change that URL > to things like proxy:http://zonk/zapp or redirect:http://something/else. > > Now, this is hard to explain. :-) nd --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
