Re: CGI/1.1 draft

• Mail folder: WWW Talk Jan 94-present
• Next message: Kevin 'Kev' Hughes: "Confidential directory"
• Previous message: Robert S. Thau: "CGI/1.1 draft"
• Maybe in reply to: Robert S. Thau: "CGI/1.1 draft"
• Reply: Rob McCool: "Re: CGI/1.1 draft"

Errors-To: listmaster@www0.cern.ch
Date: Tue, 1 Mar 1994 22:51:14 --100
Message-id: <9403012148.AA09452@ptsun03.cern.ch>
Errors-To: listmaster@www0.cern.ch
Reply-To: luotonen@ptsun00.cern.ch
Originator: www-talk@info.cern.ch
Sender: www-talk@www0.cern.ch
Precedence: bulk
From: luotonen@ptsun00.cern.ch (Ari Luotonen)
To: Multiple recipients of list <www-talk@www0.cern.ch>
Subject: Re: CGI/1.1 draft
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas
Content-Length: 955

> You should be aware however, that (as someone described recently in 
> a www-talk post) script writers are taking PATH_TRANSLATED and
> trying to delete PATH_INFO from the end to obtain a document root.
> They are doing this because their scripts need to access more than
> one asscociated file.  How will this work with cern_httpd?

The concept of document root is simply unknown to cern_httpd.
You just map a part of URL space to physical file system, and
the URL hierarchy is in no way bound to the physical file system
hierarchy.  You can omit physical directories from between, you
can map many "URL directories" to a physical directory, and in
a pathologic case what seems to be a subdirectory could actually
be a parent directory.

This is all theory, and nobody really uses the rules like that,
but its possible.  In other words having a document root, a single
one or many of them, just doesn't necessarily make any sense.

-- Cheers, Ari --