Suppose the following RewriteRule exists: (and ignoring for the moment
that the pattern and substitution are hard-coded)

RewriteRule ^categoryname/itemname index.shtml?
categoryGuid=42&itemGuid=cf34b0c1-e215-4d4c-aede-b53ba6256da0

Now suppose that index.shtml has links to assets such as images and
javascript files.
When the rule executes, index.shtml is now being executed in the
context of categoryname/itemname - so if the asset links on
index.shtml are not absolute, they will fail.

Is there a switch or some other type of mechanism through which the
resultant path can be executed in its own (in this case, root)
context? The servers this will be hosted on deliver the site content
through a variety of paths, such that index.shtml might be served from
root, or from /path/subpath/index.shtml, etc, etc - thus, I can't
write absolute paths for the asset links.

Thanks for any ,

Geoff

On Fri, 09 Feb 2007 21:13:39 +0100, geoffalot <geoff.moller@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Suppose the following RewriteRule exists: (and ignoring for the moment
> that the pattern and substitution are hard-coded)
>
> RewriteRule ^categoryname/itemname index.shtml?
> categoryGuid=42&itemGuid=cf34b0c1-e215-4d4c-aede-b53ba6256da0
>
> Now suppose that index.shtml has links to assets such as images and
> javascript files.
> When the rule executes, index.shtml is now being executed in the
> context of categoryname/itemname - so if the asset links on
> index.shtml are not absolute, they will fail.
>
> Is there a switch or some other type of mechanism through which the
> resultant path can be executed in its own (in this case, root)
> context? The servers this will be hosted on deliver the site content
> through a variety of paths, such that index.shtml might be served from
> root, or from /path/subpath/index.shtml, etc, etc - thus, I can't
> write absolute paths for the asset links.

Nope, images/script/css etc. are different requests to the server. You
might use a <base> tag in the html. Just serving everything from the root
by having '/path/to/file' url's (instead of './','../' etc.) is preferable
though.
--
Rik Wasmus

"geoffalot" <geoff.moller@gmail.com> schreef in bericht
news:1171052019.269129.105290@q2g2000cwa.googlegro ups.com...
> Suppose the following RewriteRule exists: (and ignoring for the moment
> that the pattern and substitution are hard-coded)
>
> RewriteRule ^categoryname/itemname index.shtml?
> categoryGuid=42&itemGuid=cf34b0c1-e215-4d4c-aede-b53ba6256da0
>
> Now suppose that index.shtml has links to assets such as images and
> javascript files.
> When the rule executes, index.shtml is now being executed in the
> context of categoryname/itemname - so if the asset links on
> index.shtml are not absolute, they will fail.
>
No, the concept of mod_rewrite is to change the mapping of an url to a local
file _without_ telling the browser, quite like alias or aliasmatch do. The
browser -being ignorant about the server-side diversion- will still resolve
relative links to the path of its previous request.

It's voodoo ...http://httpd.apache.org/docs/2.2/rewrite/
beyond the basic remapping it is able to send a redirect to the browser or
act as a reverse proxy


However, the given extention '.shtml' indicates mod_include is likely used
too.
I think -with absolutely NO certainty- <!--#include virtual="..." --> will
handle links relative to the URL of the current request.


HansH