Please open a defect here http://github.com/dpp/liftweb/issues ... whether or not this solution will make it in master will be subject for reviewboard. The solution I proposed has a breaking change by the introduction of Either[List[String], LiftResponse] instead of LiftResponse but I don't think that many people are using uriNotFound and it's really quite a small change which regardless needs to be announced.
Other opinions on this? Br's, Marius On Dec 30, 6:20 pm, Alex Black <a...@alexblack.ca> wrote: > > While I totally agree that a plain 404 + markup is much more > > straightforward, > > "breaks internet" are too big words :) .. sending back a > > 302 or 301 tells the UA "you asked me for a resource that I know I > > don't have but I wont tell > > you explicitely, instead I want you to go to this location as an > > alternative resource". Somehow it's like scratching with the wrong > > hand and purely from HTTP protocol perspective this is not quite > > straightforward as 404 + template, but I don't necessarily see it as a > > so bad thing. > > Heh, I apologise, definitely "breaking the internet" is a bit > dramatic. I do have a different view than you though, I think its > incorrect to return a 301 or 302 in these scenarios, the correct > response is 404. Not only is it the correct response, but given most > sites get 50%-90% of their traffic from Google, and Google thinks its > also correct to return 404 (http://www.google.com/url?sa=D&q=http:// > googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.com/2008/08/farewell-to- > soft-404s.html, its in our best financial interest to play nice with > Google. > > > > > Specifically for 404 (when a template is not found we could do > > something like: > > > 1. In LiftRules instead of: > > > type URINotFoundPF = PartialFunction[(Req, Box[Failure]), > > LiftResponse] > > > use > > > type URINotFoundPF = PartialFunction[(Req, Box[Failure]), Either[List > > [String], LiftResponse]] > > > so that function can return a template path instead of response. > > > 2. In LiftSession#processRequest instead of applying the normal > > request pipeline only if the addressed template is found, we can use > > the path obtained from LiftRules.uriNotFound if Lift fails to find the > > normal tempalte. Hence apply the normal rendering pipeline to the > > template referenced by uriNotFound. > > > This approach allows your 404 case to be handled by the normal > > rendering pipeline without other hacks. > > > Unless someone thinks this is a bad solution, Alex you could open an > > issue and I'll work on it. > > Thanks for proposing that solution Marius. I can't really comment on > whether or not its the right way to do it from Lift's point of view, > but as a user of Lift it sounds like it would work well. > > - Alex -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lift" group. To post to this group, send email to lift...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to liftweb+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb?hl=en.
