Re: w3c and apache team

scripsit Karl Dubost:
> At 17:52 -0700 2002-08-13, Thanasis Kinias wrote:
> >FWIW, I would have to agree with Björn on this from an end-user
> >perspective.  _Normally_ I would want a validator simply to return an
> >error if it gets a 404, but a switch (like the DOCTYPE and charset
> >overrides) to validate 403/404/whatever error pages would be quite
> >useful.  What would be problematic would be validating the 404 page by
> >default, as it could be confusing to get the ``No errors found!'' result
> >when I've miskeyed a URL.
> Did I missed something?
> Except for built-in Web server error pages (which is bad because not 
> modifiable), the Error pages are often real files like for example

Often, but not always.  A default Apache installation, for example
(which is what started this thread) uses dynamically-generated error
pages.  If they live anywhere as distinct HTML files I can call with a
URI, I'm unaware of it.

Thanasis Kinias
Web Developer, Information Technology
Graduate Student, Department of History
Arizona State University
Tempe, Arizona, U.S.A.

Ash nazg durbatulūk, ash nazg gimbatul,
Ash nazg thrakatulūk agh burzum-ishi krimpatul

Received on Tuesday, 13 August 2002 21:24:09 UTC