[pLog-svn] 1.2.6 release?

Jon Daley plogworld at jon.limedaley.com
Thu Jan 17 11:44:58 EST 2008

On Thu, 17 Jan 2008, Mark Wu wrote:
> About the bug(or say issue) about return 404 or 200 status code ... I think
> we should fix it before we release 1.2.6

> 1. If we use raw url (native url),  we should return the customized page(
> with our current error page "article fetch error") with http response status
> 200. Becasue in native url, the script name is the reasouce we want to
> fetch, the other parts just only parameters.
 	Is that necessary?  I would expect either search engines to not be 
able to search a parameterized site at all, or be able to distinguish 
different parameters as different sites, and so not think that a 404 on 
one page would mean a 404 on all others.  I was under the impression that 
search engines didn't like parameterized sites, and so that is why we 
created the "search engine friendly" URLs before we had custom URLs.  But, 
I don't really know the answer to that, and if someone else says that 
isn't how it works, then we should return a 200.

> 2. If we use custom/pretty/mod_rewrite url, we should return customized
> page( with our current error page "article fetch error" ) with http reponse
> status 404. Becasue the "whole url" is the resource we want to fetch. These
> three kind of url is more similar to RESTful url ...
 	That sounds good.

> ** There will be one problem if we use this method. In ie6, if it get 404
> status, it will redirect to it's own 404 page in local desktop. But, I think
> it is okay.
 	That is a setting in IE6 (and IE7 I think), and that is the 
person's choice, and we shouldn't design around that.

More information about the pLog-svn mailing list