Hi Rich, > First draft of .htaccess tutorial-style documentation
"may have overriden directives" -> possible typo ("overridden")?
"cgi execution is not permitted" -> better write "CGI" uppercase
"whether a particular diretive is permitted" -> typo ("directive").
"Please see the authentication tutorial" -> would be worth a link
(to "auth.html" in the same directory)
"check the Context line for ".htaccess"" -> "full stop" is missing.
"(See section on how directives are applied, below.)" -> would be worth
a relative link (to the local target "#how"), then omit the ", below".
"How directives are applied:" -> remove the ":" from this headline.
"When (not) to use them" points to "When (not) to use .htaccess files",
should rather be identical.
"Server side includes" points to "SSI example" -> same as above.
"CGI" points to "CGI example" -> same as above.
(I suggest using the headlines as link texts, not vice versa.)
All of the modifications mentioned above and a little different
HTML coding (putting <code class="file">...</code> around file
and path names, and <code class="directive">...</code> around
directives outside example sections), and using two lines of CSS
(that may be removed without damaging anything) please find attached.
I wondered whether it might pay to put links to the corresponding
positions within the articles where directives are mentioned
(like "using the <a href="../mod/core.html#accessfilename">AccessFileName
directive</a>"); if used consequently, the links would be ready at
hand for the reader, while they currently are only listed at the
top of the article.
But if so, this would rather have to be used consistently in all
"howto" articles, thus I didn't try to invent a new rule.
Regards, Michael
(who would volunteer to translate this article to German)
(See attached file: htaccess.html)
htaccess.html
Description: Binary data
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
