Because the framework never render status code other than 404,500 and
400 itself. So there is no need to offer a way to customize something
that is never generated by the framework.
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 2:00 PM, flurdy wrote:
> Threads such as this on Stack Overflow
> : http://stackoverflow.com/questions/3297048/403-forbidden-vs-401-unauthorized-http-responses
> muddles the water further regarding 401 v 403, but I believe in my case I
> should probably use 401s.
>
> However 403 still seems a common error code to template?
>
>
>
> On Thursday, May 3, 2012 1:53:50 PM UTC+2, flurdy wrote:
>>
>>
>> Is there a particular reason for why 403 Forbidden Http handlers and
>> template can not be "easily" customised by the framework?
>>
>> I realise Play is unlikely to have easy-to-override handlers for all
>> possible http error codes via the GloablSettings trait, but I would have
>> thought 403 was as common as 500, 404 and 401 that do have overridable
>> handlers.
>>
>> I was thinking of forking and adding my own method to GlobalSettings and a
>> defaultpages template, but I was wondering if there was a particular reason
>> for 403 not being already there?
>>
>> is it not a recommended error code?
>> Is 401 a more suitable error code for users authenticated but not
>> authorised for a particular page?
>> or should it be handled by the browser not via template?
>>
> --
--
Guillaume Bort
Guillaume, if the framework never generastes a 403, why does this exist?
On Thursday, May 3, 2012 3:57:20 PM UTC+2, Guillaume Bort wrote:
--