Re: Common Log file format. Quick refresher?

• Mail folder: WWW Talk Apr 94-present
• Next message: Kenneth Chang: "Re: Revised Beginner's Guide to HTML available for perusal"
• Previous message: John Lewis: "Re: Revised Beginner's Guide to HTML available for perusal"
• Maybe in reply to: Paul "S." Wain: "Common Log file format. Quick refresher?"
• Reply: Martin Hamilton: "Re: Common Log file format. Quick refresher?"

Errors-To: listmaster@www0.cern.ch
Date: Tue, 19 Apr 1994 23:40:29 --100
Message-id: <Pine.3.07.9404191636.D24278-9100000@brazos.is.rice.edu>
Errors-To: listmaster@www0.cern.ch
Reply-To: troth@rice.edu
Originator: www-talk@info.cern.ch
Sender: www-talk@www0.cern.ch
Precedence: bulk
From: Rick Troth <troth@rice.edu>
To: Multiple recipients of list <www-talk@www0.cern.ch>
Subject: Re: Common Log file format. Quick refresher?
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Mime-Version: 1.0
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Length: 316

> site.domain - - [dd/MM/YYYY:HH:MM:SS +/-XXXX] "GET <URI>" SSS ???
 
	Argh!  I joined after this thread was hashed out. 
	Why didn't we go with a year-first date format? 
 
-- 
"There's just some things that numbers can't measure" - Bob Bennett 
Rick Troth <troth@rice.edu>, Rice University, Information Systems