DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
<http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=8516>.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=8516
ScriptAction to invoke a file instead of a URL path?
wrowe@apache.org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Component|mod_isapi |mod_actions
OS/Version|Windows NT/2K |All
Platform|Other |All
Summary|Improvement to mod_isapi |ScriptAction to invoke a
| |file instead of a URL path?
Version|2.0.32 |HEAD
------- Additional Comments From wrowe@apache.org 2002-05-15 03:12 -------
I see your issue, although I wouldn't classify it as a problem, I'd
suggest we reframe this as an "Enhancement request to mod_action" to
effectively implement a 'script action' that is hidden from the
perspective of the envvars reviewed by the script.
HOWEVER, SOAPISAP.DLL WAS AN ANALOGY!!! Suppose the ISAPI will
be c:\mydlldir\mydll.dll and http://localhost/virtdir/myfile.wsdl
will be invoked.
ScriptAlias /wsdl "c:/mydlldir/mydll.dll"
Action my-handler "/wsdl"
AddHandler my-handler .wsdl
Is a much simpler way of saying things.
I'd suggest the improvement would be an Action that maps, instead
of to a URI, into a File. Say, a ScriptAction directive (ScriptAlias
plus Action, eh?)
Now this could be applied [explicitly] to cause a certain program or
module to be invoked for a given class of requests, as follows;
ScriptAction my-handler "c:/mydlldir/mydll.dll"
AddHandler my-handler .wsdl
I'll ask Josh Slive and others to look at this proposal and tell me
why we don't need new directives [surely we can already do this, no?]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: bugs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: bugs-help@httpd.apache.org
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
<http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=8516>.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=8516
ScriptAction to invoke a file instead of a URL path?
wrowe@apache.org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Component|mod_isapi |mod_actions
OS/Version|Windows NT/2K |All
Platform|Other |All
Summary|Improvement to mod_isapi |ScriptAction to invoke a
| |file instead of a URL path?
Version|2.0.32 |HEAD
------- Additional Comments From wrowe@apache.org 2002-05-15 03:12 -------
I see your issue, although I wouldn't classify it as a problem, I'd
suggest we reframe this as an "Enhancement request to mod_action" to
effectively implement a 'script action' that is hidden from the
perspective of the envvars reviewed by the script.
HOWEVER, SOAPISAP.DLL WAS AN ANALOGY!!! Suppose the ISAPI will
be c:\mydlldir\mydll.dll and http://localhost/virtdir/myfile.wsdl
will be invoked.
ScriptAlias /wsdl "c:/mydlldir/mydll.dll"
Action my-handler "/wsdl"
AddHandler my-handler .wsdl
Is a much simpler way of saying things.
I'd suggest the improvement would be an Action that maps, instead
of to a URI, into a File. Say, a ScriptAction directive (ScriptAlias
plus Action, eh?)
Now this could be applied [explicitly] to cause a certain program or
module to be invoked for a given class of requests, as follows;
ScriptAction my-handler "c:/mydlldir/mydll.dll"
AddHandler my-handler .wsdl
I'll ask Josh Slive and others to look at this proposal and tell me
why we don't need new directives [surely we can already do this, no?]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: bugs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: bugs-help@httpd.apache.org