W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > October 2010

Re: ACTION-462: URI Fragments and HTTP redirects

From: Nathan <nathan@webr3.org>
Date: Fri, 08 Oct 2010 15:17:03 +0100
Message-ID: <4CAF27DF.30703@webr3.org>
To: Yves Lafon <ylafon@w3.org>
CC: www-tag@w3.org
Yves Lafon wrote:
> On Mon, 4 Oct 2010, Yves Lafon wrote:
>> My position on this is that:
>> * Fragments in redirects have a real value and are already used.
>> * Fragment recombination can be hard and impossible in the general case
>> * We need to define a good story for applying a fragment to a 
>> redirected URI
>>  with a different fragment.
> And the proposal is:
> << When retrieving a resource A leads to a redirect to an URI B 
> containing a fragment, any existing fragment on A MUST be dropped in 
> favor of B's Fragment >>
> Original URI: A#Frag1
> -> GET A
> -> 3xx Location: B#frag2
> Final URI -> B#frag2

If I request A#Frag1 then in english I would say it as "get me A, 
whatever that is, then tell me what #Frag1 is" - what happens at HTTP 
level appears to be of no concern to a client / agent.

It appears to suggest that a server must understand the semantics and 
contents of the media type of the message - does Apache HTTP server know 
the fragments within static XML/HTML documents it may serve?

But then I've often been confused as to why HTTP allows fragments in the 
Location but not in the request line.


Received on Friday, 8 October 2010 14:18:15 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:33:07 UTC