W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-html-editor@w3.org > July to September 1999

Re: HTML 4.0.1 (fwd)

From: Mark Needleman <mneedlem@dra.com>
Date: Wed, 1 Sep 1999 11:04:20 -0500 (CDT)
To: Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org>
cc: Dave Raggett <dsr@w3.org>, www-html-editor@w3.org
Message-ID: <Pine.OSF.3.95.990901110135.7785B-100000@tourist.dra.com>
Ian

thanks for your comments - i looked at the HTTP spec but didnt notice a
mechanism for a time delay before the server side redirect (you were right
- thats what I meant)

HTML might be better for this because (at least we want) the page change
to occurr only if that page has been displayed for x amount of time - with
HTTP the server wouldnt know what is going on since the browser might be
off talking to another server

mark


On Wed, 1 Sep 1999, Ian Jacobs wrote:

> Dave Raggett wrote:
> 
> > 
> > Mr Raggett
> > 
> > I was reviewing the HTM 4.0.1 specification that was recently put our for
> > review. It mentions that the meta autorefresh example was taken out since
> > its not part of the specification. It suggests server side includes
> > instead. 
> 
> Actually, it says "server side redirects". From 7.4.4:
> 
>   <QUOTE>Instead, automatic page forwarding 
>          should be done using server-side redirects.</QUOTE>
> 
> > As far as I can tell this is not exactly the same thing. Perhaps
> > you could explain how a server side include could do this.
> > 
> > The functionality wanted is to be able to change the page after a defined
> > time period. 
> 
> I do not know whether HTTP 1.1 [1] allows delays before
> redirects. I can look into this.
> 
> [1] http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2616.txt
> 
> > Expires or Location in HTTP wont do this - expires because it doesnt force
> > the browser to do anything and location because that would be an immediate
> > referral
> > 
> > It would be nice to have some standardized mechanism either in HTTP or in
> > HTML
> 
> I believe HTTP is the proper forum for this.
>  
> > I realize that just because it was removed from the spec doesnt mean
> > Browser vendors will stop supporting it - but it would potentially be
> > easier to count on if there was a standardized mechanism for doing this
> 
> I agree, but since it's not standard HTML 4.0, it was removed
> from this version of the spec.
>  
> Thank you for your comments,
> 
>  - Ian
> 
> -- 
> Ian Jacobs (jacobs@w3.org)   http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs
> 
Received on Wednesday, 1 September 1999 12:04:23 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 March 2012 18:16:45 GMT