On Dec 14, 2007 6:10 PM, Lars Trieloff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > ...I think this is the best proposal, > > put the 404.esp (or 401.esp or 500.esp for this purpose) into the > content tree, and all matching errors will look for a script ascending > the content tree. If nothing can be found, the default servlet kicks > in and shows a plain error message....
Sounds reasonable, but currently scripts and content are well separated...this would introduce "programming stuff" in the content, which I don't like too much. But I don't have a better proposal at this time... -Bertrand > > regards, > > Lars > > On 13.12.2007, at 16:26, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > Could the system look up the tree from the requested resource for > > the error script? If no error script is found in the tree it could > > look for one in a default location. For example, if a request is > > made for > > > > /a/b/c/foo.html > > > > Which results in a 404 the system would look in > > > > /a/b/c > > /a/b > > /a > > /error > > > > For 404.esp > > > > WDYT? > > > > Paddy > > Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: "Bertrand Delacretaz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2007 13:58:40 > > To:[email protected] > > Subject: Re: Chickens, eggs and stars > > > > > > On Dec 12, 2007 5:52 PM, Michael Marth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Re issue 1): > >> > >> we could have a 404 handler script that kicks in when a non-existing > >> resource is requested.... > > > > Good idea. Do you have a suggestion about how to select which 404 > > script to use? > > > > Assume I have dropped some scripts under /apps/foo, and I request > > /content/foo which does not exist. > > > > IIUC you'd want in this case to use the /apps/foo/status.404.esp > > script to handle this error, but how do we decide that this script is > > more appropriate than, say, /bar/somewhere/404.esp? > > > > We might say that we replace the first level of the pathname (/content > > in this case) with /apps, and use that as a starting point to look for > > scripts. That's a simple enough rule, but it's a bit constraining. > > > > -Bertrand > > -- > Lars Trieloff > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://weblogs.goshaky.com/weblogs/lars > > -- Bertrand Delacretaz http://www.codeconsult.ch
