Re: Moving files, was: Re: OFF-TOPIC: Provider blues -Reply

Stuart Young (
Thu, 5 Sep 1996 20:18:33 +1000 (EST)

Date: Thu, 5 Sep 1996 20:18:33 +1000 (EST)
From: Stuart Young <>
To: Charles Peyton Taylor <>
Subject: Re: Moving files, was: Re: OFF-TOPIC: Provider blues -Reply
In-Reply-To: <>
Message-ID: <>

On Tue, 3 Sep 1996, Charles Peyton Taylor wrote:

> I think a dummy file is *WORSE* than just deleting a file. If you 
> use an automatic link-checker (as I do) you will never know that 
> a Link is about to go away, or that the information is no longer 
> there, with a dummy web page.  The best thing to do is have the 
> server redirect the file to another location.  That way, the move
> will get the attention of those of us who have a *lot* of links 
> to look after.

The 'over-writing files' with a dummy is aimed only as a short term 
solution. The file should (as you say) be deleted and/or redirected. But 
the issue in question was that a particular 'ISP based' web server would 
only allow you to 'place' files, not delete them (or re-direct calls to 
said files), without actually getting on the phone and calling the ISP up 
and asking them to delete the files manually.

As you can guess, when you get a lot of pages, this becomes a mess to 
deal with all the time. The idea was to over-write with the dummy files 
till you can call them and get them to delete them. Expecially since all 
the dummy files will be pretty much the same length, this makes the 
sys-admins job easier remembering all the files to delete.

Since some HTML authors work and update their sites outside business 
hours, when an ISP won't answer the phone, ... well you get the idea.

| Stuart Young (aka Cefiar)  - You may be human, but you're still animals! |
| - IF you've done 6 impossible things, write HTML |