469,269 Members | 1,006 Online
Bytes | Developer Community
New Post

Home Posts Topics Members FAQ

Post your question to a community of 469,269 developers. It's quick & easy.

Gives 404 Error on Page that exists

When I try to validate my page
http://www.ajaydsouza.com/wordpress/wpthemes/

I get this:

I got the following unexpected response when trying to retrieve
<http://www.ajaydsouza.com/wordpress/wpthemes/>:

404 Not Found

Please make sure you have entered the URL correctly.
This is rather weird, because the page very much exists. all subfolders
of wpthemes/ are also throwing up this error.

URI:
http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=ht...%2Fwpthemes%2F

Someone have an suggestions to fixing this problem?

Jul 24 '05 #1
15 8334
Els
Ajay DSouza wrote:
When I try to validate my page
http://www.ajaydsouza.com/wordpress/wpthemes/

I get this:

I got the following unexpected response when trying to retrieve
<http://www.ajaydsouza.com/wordpress/wpthemes/>:

404 Not Found

Please make sure you have entered the URL correctly.

This is rather weird, because the page very much exists. all subfolders
of wpthemes/ are also throwing up this error.

URI:
http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=ht...%2Fwpthemes%2F

Someone have an suggestions to fixing this problem?


What is the name of the file? index.html and index.php give a 404.

--
Els http://locusmeus.com/
Sonhos vem. Sonhos vo. O resto imperfeito.
- Renato Russo -
Now playing: Deep Purple - Speed King
Jul 24 '05 #2
Ajay DSouza wrote:
When I try to validate my page
http://www.ajaydsouza.com/wordpress/wpthemes/
There is no such page, in WWW terms. The server returns code 404. If a
document accompanies, it is treated - according to the HTTP protocol -
as _error message_ explaining why the page does not exist, or for
similar purposes. It is not to be treated as the requested resource but
as an explanation of the absence of the requested resource.
Someone have an suggestions to fixing this problem?


Apparently the server has been misconfigured.

Jul 24 '05 #3
Ajay DSouza wrote:
When I try to validate my page
http://www.ajaydsouza.com/wordpress/wpthemes/

I got the following unexpected response when trying to retrieve
<http://www.ajaydsouza.com/wordpress/wpthemes/>:
404 Not Found
Please make sure you have entered the URL correctly.

The first header response to the URL is a 404. The browser ignores it
for some reason and continues to request files. I guess the validator is
not so forgiving. I expect that spiders would ignore your site for the
same reason.
You are doing something tricky at the server in the way it provides
content. Check your error logs.

--
jmm dash list (at) sohnen-moe (dot) com
(Remove .AXSPAMGN for email)
Jul 24 '05 #4
Jim Moe wrote:
The first header response to the URL is a 404. The browser ignores it
for some reason and continues to request files.


The browser doesn't ignore it, it displays the explanation of the error
(which includes associated images, styles, and so on)

--
David Dorward <http://blog.dorward.me.uk/> <http://dorward.me.uk/>
Home is where the ~/.bashrc is
Jul 24 '05 #5
David Dorward wrote:
The first header response to the URL is a 404. The browser ignores it
for some reason and continues to request files.


The browser doesn't ignore it, it displays the explanation of the error
(which includes associated images, styles, and so on)

Um, no. The page displays text, images, layout but no error message(s).
The source shows typical HTML.
Unless you mean the page *is* the error?

--
jmm dash list (at) sohnen-moe (dot) com
(Remove .AXSPAMGN for email)
Jul 24 '05 #6
Jim Moe <jm***************@sohnen-moe.com> wrote:
David Dorward wrote:
The first header response to the URL is a 404. The browser
ignores it for some reason and continues to request files.


The browser doesn't ignore it, it displays the explanation of the
error (which includes associated images, styles, and so on)

Um, no. The page displays text, images, layout but no error
message(s).
The source shows typical HTML.
Unless you mean the page *is* the error?


The page *is* the error message, by the HTTP protocol.

"The 4xx class of status code is intended for cases in which the client
seems to have erred. Except when responding to a HEAD request, the
server SHOULD include an entity containing an explanation of the error
situation, and whether it is a temporary or permanent condition. These
status codes are applicable to any request method. User agents SHOULD
display any included entity to the user."
http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/...0.html#sec10.4

(A browser normally sends a GET request, not a HEAD request, when you
follow a link or otherwise try to visit a URL. Conceivably, a browser
_could_ first send a HEAD request and then, if the headers indicate
that the resource exists, a GET request. But it is generally more
efficient to send GET directly, since the response contains the headers
in that case, too.)

We might blame browsers for not making this explicit, e.g. by showing
an error symbol on the status line. But after all, it is the author's
(or webmaster's) duty to write or generate the error message so that it
will be understood as an error message.

--
Yucca, http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/
Pages about Web authoring: http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/www.html

Jul 24 '05 #7
Jukka K. Korpela said the following on 2005-06-19 07:22:
Jim Moe <jm***************@sohnen-moe.com> wrote:
Um, no. The page displays text, images, layout but no error
message(s).
The source shows typical HTML.
Unless you mean the page *is* the error?


The page *is* the error message, by the HTTP protocol.


I'm intrigued, I've never seen something like this.

When I do a "telnet www.ajaydsouza.com http" and request a "GET /wordpress/wpthemes/ HTTP/1.0" or a "GET /wordpress/HTTP/1.0" I get something like a 404 on the requested URI and an additional 404 for an ErrorDocument, yet both URI's give "normal" pages in browsers.

How's that possible? I would expect some kind of the same error in browsers like the telnet shows. Is this due to the difference in request headers supplied by browsers and the lack there of in my telnet action?

--
Regards
Harrie
Jul 24 '05 #8
On Mon, 20 Jun 2005, Harrie wrote:
Jukka K. Korpela said the following on 2005-06-19 07:22:
The page *is* the error message, by the HTTP protocol.
I'm intrigued, I've never seen something like this.


So what do *you* expect an error page to look like?

(I'm disregarding the subject line of this thread. If the return code
is 404 then the page does *not* exist, in this sense.)

Take a quick look at RFC2616, which defines the protocol, and see that
many HTTP return codes are appropriately accompanied by a "content
body". That's no different in principle than the content body you get
with a 200 OK: the key difference is the HTTP code.
When I do a "telnet www.ajaydsouza.com http" and request a "GET
/wordpress/wpthemes/ HTTP/1.0" or a "GET /wordpress/HTTP/1.0" I get something
like a 404 on the requested URI and an additional 404 for an ErrorDocument,
Well, that indicates an error in server configuration; but there's
only one HTTP transaction response, and, in this case, that's
returning a 404, we're told.
yet both URI's give "normal" pages in browsers.


Your browser is displaying the content body, which is expected to
contain some informative text about the situation. What else would
you want it to do? (unless you're BillG, of course - then the rule
would be to toss away the informative detail, and invent some
misleading explanation of his own...).

Jul 24 '05 #9
Harrie wrote:
When I do a "telnet www.ajaydsouza.com http" and request a "GET
/wordpress/wpthemes/ HTTP/1.0" or a "GET /wordpress/HTTP/1.0" I get
something like a 404 on the requested URI and an additional 404 for an
ErrorDocument, yet both URI's give "normal" pages in browsers.


I don't (maybe you forgot the Host header?):

leif@debian:/tmp$ telnet ajaydsouza.com 80
Trying 67.19.7.42...
Connected to jupiter.as-hosting.com.
Escape character is '^]'.
GET /wordpress/wpthemes/ HTTP/1.1
Host: ajaydsouza.com

HTTP/1.1 404 Not Found
Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2005 16:27:56 GMT
Server: Apache/1.3.33 (Unix) mod_auth_passthrough/1.8 mod_log_bytes/1.2
mod_bwlimited/1.4 PHP/4.3.11 FrontPage/5.0.2.2635 mod_ssl/2.8.22
OpenSSL/0.9.7a
X-Powered-By: PHP/4.3.11
X-Pingback: http://www.ajaydsouza.com/xmlrpc.php
Connection: close
Transfer-Encoding: chunked
Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8

50bc
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd">
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
<head profile="http://gmpg.org/xfn/1">
<title>Ajay - On the Road called Life! &raquo; Themes for
WordPress</title>
[snip the rest]
Jul 24 '05 #10
Harrie wrote:
Unless you mean the page *is* the error?


The page *is* the error message, by the HTTP protocol.


I'm intrigued, I've never seen something like this.

Yes, it is a bizarre method for delivering content. Ir certainly
discourages bots and validators from looking at the page.

--
jmm dash list (at) sohnen-moe (dot) com
(Remove .AXSPAMGN for email)
Jul 24 '05 #11
Leif K-Brooks said the following on 2005-06-20 18:30:
Harrie wrote:
When I do a "telnet www.ajaydsouza.com http" and request a "GET
/wordpress/wpthemes/ HTTP/1.0" or a "GET /wordpress/HTTP/1.0" I get
something like a 404 on the requested URI and an additional 404 for an
ErrorDocument, yet both URI's give "normal" pages in browsers.


I don't (maybe you forgot the Host header?):


Yup, thanks.

Although a Host: header does work with HTTP 1.0 (I thought one of the differences between 1.0 and 1.1 was the virtual host thing), I probably should default to HTTP 1.1 (I used 1.0 with the telnet command, therefor I didn't thought about the Host: header).

--
Regards
Harrie
Jul 24 '05 #12
Alan J. Flavell said the following on 2005-06-20 18:06:
On Mon, 20 Jun 2005, Harrie wrote:
Jukka K. Korpela said the following on 2005-06-19 07:22:
The page *is* the error message, by the HTTP protocol.
I'm intrigued, I've never seen something like this.


So what do *you* expect an error page to look like?


I don't have an answer to that, but I didn't expect to see a page with "content" ("non error" content that is).

But I was mostly intrigued by the fact that a check with telnet gave me an error page which looked like something I was expecting, but I forgot about the Host: header.
(I'm disregarding the subject line of this thread. If the return code
is 404 then the page does *not* exist, in this sense.)
That's why I was expecting anything else than an actual page which looks normal.
Take a quick look at RFC2616, which defines the protocol, and see that
many HTTP return codes are appropriately accompanied by a "content
body". That's no different in principle than the content body you get
with a 200 OK: the key difference is the HTTP code.
Interesting, I wasn't aware of that, thanks, I shall look into it.
When I do a "telnet www.ajaydsouza.com http" and request a "GET
/wordpress/wpthemes/ HTTP/1.0" or a "GET /wordpress/HTTP/1.0" I get something
like a 404 on the requested URI and an additional 404 for an ErrorDocument,


Well, that indicates an error in server configuration; but there's
only one HTTP transaction response, and, in this case, that's
returning a 404, we're told.


It was probably the answer of a default site since I didn't use a Host: header.
yet both URI's give "normal" pages in browsers.


Your browser is displaying the content body, which is expected to
contain some informative text about the situation. What else would
you want it to do? [..]


That's exactly what I expected and didn't get.
[..] (unless you're BillG, of course - then the rule
would be to toss away the informative detail, and invent some
misleading explanation of his own...).


Are you really, Really, REALLY sure? ;)

--
Regards
Harrie
Jul 24 '05 #13
Jim Moe said the following on 2005-06-20 20:10:
Harrie wrote:
I'm intrigued, I've never seen something like this.

Yes, it is a bizarre method for delivering content. Ir certainly
discourages bots and validators from looking at the page.


LOL

lynx also chokes on it. Looks like it's choking on text/xml, but I don't see why it's accepting something which it can't understand. But that probably more of a browser question and therefor off topic.

--
Regards
Harrie
Jul 24 '05 #14
Harrie wrote:
Although a Host: header does work with HTTP 1.0 (I thought one of the
differences between 1.0 and 1.1 was the virtual host thing),


I'm not sure if Host was in 1.0 or not, the spec does allow for extensions
IIRC.

HTTP 1.1 made it a non-optional header though.
--
David Dorward <http://blog.dorward.me.uk/> <http://dorward.me.uk/>
Home is where the ~/.bashrc is
Jul 24 '05 #15
On Tue, 21 Jun 2005, Harrie wrote:
So what do *you* expect an error page to look like?
I don't have an answer to that, but I didn't expect to see a page with
"content" ("non error" content that is).


OK, this seems to have been a mutual misunderstanding. I hadn't
tested the actual site, so I was following up on the basis of what I
was reading in the posting.
That's why I was expecting anything else than an actual page which
looks normal.


OK, I thought you were expecting the browser to react in some special
way.

Normally, it just "renders the content body", whatever that may
contain. What it contains is determined by the server configuration.
It may be conventional to refer to the error code and reason text and
so on - but that's not an absolute requirement. You'll find plenty of
servers which respond to any 404 condition with an advertisement for
their sponsors, for example...

There *should* be some indication, somewhere, that the transaction did
not end with 200 OK, but in practice that tends to be a bit
inconspicuous. However, if you're scripting a web retrieval (for
example, wget) then the software will take more care over this
distinction!
[..] (unless you're BillG, of course - then the rule would be to toss away the informative detail, and invent some misleading explanation of his
own...).


Are you really, Really, REALLY sure? ;)


"Try again later" ?
Jul 24 '05 #16

This discussion thread is closed

Replies have been disabled for this discussion.

Similar topics

1 post views Thread by VB Programmer | last post: by
6 posts views Thread by vips | last post: by
1 post views Thread by M Keeton | last post: by
5 posts views Thread by amatuer | last post: by
reply views Thread by wardy | last post: by
1 post views Thread by ThatsIT.net.au | last post: by
2 posts views Thread by devgupta01 | last post: by
reply views Thread by suresh191 | last post: by
By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.