[pLog-svn] 1.2.6 release?

Jon Daley plogworld at jon.limedaley.com
Tue Jan 22 08:42:50 EST 2008

 	I haven't had much luck finding out any documentation on what the 
correct answer is.  To me, it seems that the search engines should be 
smart enough to parse the parameters correctly, and if they get a 404 with 
one parameter and a 200 with another, not get confused and throw out the 
whole site.

 	I finally found one article that says what someone else does, 
which is what I expected.


 	I tried looking up the definitions of URI, URL, URN to see if 
parameters were included in that definition, but I could't find that 

 	In any case, I would rather release what you have checked in than 
delay the release any longer.  A couple more people have seen the cache 
bug, and it'd be nice to solve that.

On Tue, 22 Jan 2008, Mark Wu wrote:

> Hi Reto & Jon:
> Sorry  for the late reply. Busy recently.
> URL = Universal "Resource" Locator
> The reason that we return 200 instead of 404 in "native url mode" is becasue
> the "resource" in "native url mode" is the script itself instead of the
> whole url.
> So, the "script" does "founded" in ths case,  return 200 is a valid
> behavior.
> But in Custom/Pretty/Reqrite mode, the resource is the "whole url string".
> (Just like the RESTful url)
> So, we did not found the "URL", and we should return 404, instead of 200.
> Even we already provide a error page here.
> Mark
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: plog-svn-bounces at devel.lifetype.net
>> [mailto:plog-svn-bounces at devel.lifetype.net] On Behalf Of Jon Daley
>> Sent: Friday, January 18, 2008 12:45 AM
>> To: LifeType Developer List
>> Subject: Re: [pLog-svn] 1.2.6 release?
>> 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
>>  	ok.
>>> 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.
>> _______________________________________________
>> pLog-svn mailing list
>> pLog-svn at devel.lifetype.net
>> http://limedaley.com/mailman/listinfo/plog-svn
> _______________________________________________
> pLog-svn mailing list
> pLog-svn at devel.lifetype.net
> http://limedaley.com/mailman/listinfo/plog-svn

Jon Daley

Always be sincere, even when you don't mean it.
-- Irene Peter

More information about the pLog-svn mailing list