On Thu, 2002-08-15 at 18:38, Patrick Luby wrote:
> Remy and Costin,
>
> I found the following draft wording that is being considered for the
> Servlet 2.4 spec. The exact wording may change, but the context should
> stay the same. Are there any unimplementable pieces in this proposed
> wording:
>
> The wording in the 4th paragraph in section 9.10 of the Servlet 2.4 spec
> may change to:
>
> The web server must append each welcome file in the order
> specified in the deployment descriptor to the partial request and
> check whether a [static] resource [or servlet] in the WAR is
> mapped to that request URI. The web container must send the
> request to the first resource in the WAR that matches [in the
> order of 1. a static resource, 2. a servlet that matches
> exactly, 3. a servlet that matches according to the path
> mapping rule].
>
> Patrick
Humm... how does this help?
First, note that the "extension mapping" is not mentioned, so things
like *.jsp, *.boo are not relevant to welcome files.
Consider this,
<servlet-mapping>
<servlet-name>BooServlet</servlet-name>
<url-pattern>/boo/*</url-pattern>
</servlet-mapping>
<servlet-mapping>
<servlet-name>FooServlet</servlet-name>
<url-pattern>/boo/foo/*</url-pattern>
</servlet-mapping>
<servlet-mapping>
<servlet-name>ExServlet</servlet-name>
<url-pattern>exactMatch</url-pattern>
</servlet-mapping>
<welcome-file-list>
<welcome-file>index.html</welcome-file>
<welcome-file>/boo/AlwaysGoesHere</welcome-file>
<welcome-file>/boo/foo/NeverGetsHere</welcome-file>
<welcome-file>exactMatch</welcome-file>
<welcome-file>index.jsp</welcome-file> <!-- how come extension
mapping is ok here? or is it not ok. -->
</welcome-file-list>
Somewhat confused (typical),
Bob
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
