W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > October to December 2003

Re: Redirection

From: Sue Young <ysue@echonyc.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 01:14:03 -0500
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.0.20031111011220.00babf88@echonyc.com>
To: Matthew Smith <matt@kbc.net.au>, WAI Interest Group <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>

We are in the process of adding Google to our enterprise web. You don't 
need to recreate the docs in HTML format for Google to spider them: you 
just need to make sure there are no cookies  and/or session IDs on the page.

Sue Young

At 04:18 PM 11/11/2003 +1030, Matthew Smith wrote:

>Greetings
>
>I have a situation where a number of documents were served from a database 
>and generated 'on-the-fly'.  These documents were all accessed from a 
>single URI, with the query string selecting the document.
>
>To enable Google to index the material, the documents are being re-created 
>as HTML documents rather than dynamic ones.  The original URI will still 
>provide the listings (and metadata), but the links will be to the new HTML 
>documents.
>
>The problem, as I see it, is that calling the URI with the old 'display 
>document' query string will no longer work since the document content will 
>no longer be stored in the database.
>
>Would it be acceptable to send an HTTP 301 code from the programme to 
>redirect the user agent to new document location (the HTML file)?
>
>I appreciate that the Guidelines don't like META element redirects, but 
>what about this technique?
>
>I don't see how this could constitute an accessibility problem unless the 
>user agent were unable to process a 301, but then is every UA fully aware 
>of every HTTP code?
>
>Cheers
>
>M
>
>--
>Matthew Smith
>Kadina Business Consultancy
>South Australia
>http://www.kbc.net.au
Received on Tuesday, 11 November 2003 01:14:05 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 19 July 2011 18:14:13 GMT