Re: Forcing to another page to load

Arnoud (galactus@htmlhelp.com)
Mon, 07 Jul 1997 19:49:15 +0200


From: galactus@htmlhelp.com (Arnoud "Galactus" Engelfriet)
To: www-html@w3.org
Subject: Re: Forcing to another page to load
Date: Mon, 07 Jul 1997 19:49:15 +0200
Message-ID: <bwSwz4uYOhsH089yn@htmlhelp.com>

In article <Pine.LNX.3.95.970706113116.8883E-100000@andrew.triumf.ca>,
Andrew Daviel <andrew@andrew.triumf.ca> wrote:
> Anyone else care to comment on the best way to move a Web page
> 1. HTTP-EQUIV=Refresh   for a few weeks, then 404  (delete page),
>   and re-submit to the search engines manually.
> 2. 301 "moved permanently" until the end of time
> 2a. 301 "moved permanently" for a while, then 404

The way we did it when our domain moved from "stack.urc.tue.nl"
to "stack.nl" was

1) Redirect people using a 301 to the new location
2) After some time, put up a stub server which only gave a "We
have moved, click here for new location" message on each request
(of course tailored for the specific URL), with a 404 code.

> Do existing robots follow a "refresh" ? (They would follow a regular link,
> in any case) (mine does)

I've seen quite a few "This site has moved" documents in query
result listings, so I guess not.

> Is there a need for some convention on a bit of HTML to satisfy both
> agents and people that a page has permanently moved ?

I'd say it's a browser issue. Something like "Wait [n] seconds when
being redirected" would be a nice option, but that can be annoying
in other situations, like imagemaps or servers that fix missing trailing
slashes on URLs. Hm.

Still, I think an HTTP code would be more appropriate than an *HTML*
extension. Locating a document is, after all, an HTTP feature.

-- 
E-mail: galactus@htmlhelp.com .................... PGP Key: 512/63B0E665
Maintainer of WDG's HTML reference: <http://www.htmlhelp.com/reference/>