Re: Suggestion: ALTHREF attribute

James Green (
Sat, 17 Jan 1998 22:06:27 +0000 (GMT)

From: James Green <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Message-Id: <>
Date: Sat, 17 Jan 1998 22:06:27 +0000 (GMT)
Subject: Re: Suggestion: ALTHREF attribute

On Fri, 16 Jan 1998 13:46:39 -0800 Alex Fabrikant 
<> wrote:

> <SNIP>
> If you think about this closely, it does sound as if a new META element 
> is being thought of:
> If this was in a page originating in the domain, which was slow, 
> and being viewed in american .com domain, the browser could quite 
> easily give an option to change. Further mirrors could be included:
> HREF2="" HREF3="">
> You get the general idea.
> The only problem it does not solve is if the source document itself 
> cannot be retrieved for some reason or another. That could be up to a 
> supplementary HTTP server redirecting requests to an appropriate 
> mirror, but that's for the hardware guys to work on, not me.
> </SNIP>
> I don't quite see why this should be handled by the HTTP server. An 
> ALTHREF (or whatever you want to call it) should accept a 
> comma(?)-delimetered list of URIs, with a single function - providing 
> the client with an alternative address to load in CASE OF AN ERROR. A 
> META or a LINK-based system can be implemented as well, allowing for 
> definition of mirror sites, but this would not relate to the same 
> problem

I'm not suggestion the ALTHREF - or MIRROR - tag shouldn't be included; 
this is under the condition that the client can get the document _in 
the first place_.

What I actually said was both a suggestion of a META element (it would 
be in the upper-most section of the page so so have the highest chance 
of being downloaded, afterall) and for a secondary mechanism in case 
the HTTP server could deliver a single sausage of information; which of 
course is reliant on the secondary workings *not* relying on the http 


James Green

Term e-mail:   |   Home e-mail: