DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT <http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28724>. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28724 ------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-11-19 00:28 ------- (In reply to comment #12) > *** Bug 32289 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** Doh! And I checked for existing reports before I submitted. Anyhow my solution was to include the request query string into the hash calculation by changing: this.requestURI = ObjectModelHelper.getRequest(objectModel).getSitemapURI(); to this.requestURI = ObjectModelHelper.getRequest(objectModel).getSitemapURI() + "?" + ObjectModelHelper.getRequest(objectModel).getQueryString(); This solves the problem when it is caused by the contents of the fragment being determined by the request parameters. (see Bug 32289 for explanation). However this will only work when the request parameters are sent by GET and not by POST. It also doesn't account for the effect of cookies, sitemap Map objects, session parameters, time dependencies and other external influences on the content of the fragment. The only real solution I see is to hash the contents of the fragment itself to generate the id, but as mentioned above it doesn't invalidate previous fragments that this fragement replaces. -- Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.
