> While I totally agree that a plain 404 + markup is much more > straightforward, > "breaks internet" are too big words :) .. sending back a > 302 or 301 tells the UA "you asked me for a resource that I know I > don't have but I wont tell > you explicitely, instead I want you to go to this location as an > alternative resource". Somehow it's like scratching with the wrong > hand and purely from HTTP protocol perspective this is not quite > straightforward as 404 + template, but I don't necessarily see it as a > so bad thing.
Heh, I apologise, definitely "breaking the internet" is a bit dramatic. I do have a different view than you though, I think its incorrect to return a 301 or 302 in these scenarios, the correct response is 404. Not only is it the correct response, but given most sites get 50%-90% of their traffic from Google, and Google thinks its also correct to return 404 (http://www.google.com/url?sa=D&q=http:// googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.com/2008/08/farewell-to- soft-404s.html, its in our best financial interest to play nice with Google. > Specifically for 404 (when a template is not found we could do > something like: > > 1. In LiftRules instead of: > > type URINotFoundPF = PartialFunction[(Req, Box[Failure]), > LiftResponse] > > use > > type URINotFoundPF = PartialFunction[(Req, Box[Failure]), Either[List > [String], LiftResponse]] > > so that function can return a template path instead of response. > > 2. In LiftSession#processRequest instead of applying the normal > request pipeline only if the addressed template is found, we can use > the path obtained from LiftRules.uriNotFound if Lift fails to find the > normal tempalte. Hence apply the normal rendering pipeline to the > template referenced by uriNotFound. > > This approach allows your 404 case to be handled by the normal > rendering pipeline without other hacks. > > Unless someone thinks this is a bad solution, Alex you could open an > issue and I'll work on it. Thanks for proposing that solution Marius. I can't really comment on whether or not its the right way to do it from Lift's point of view, but as a user of Lift it sounds like it would work well. - Alex -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lift" group. To post to this group, send email to lift...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to liftweb+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb?hl=en.
