Re: Problems with code "302 Moved Temporarily"

Richard Johnson <raj@cisco.com> wrote:
> I talked with Netscape about this problem and while they admit that their
> handling of a code "302" is not as it should be, they also pointed out that
> since the RFC uses the words, "... the client SHOULD continue to use the
> Request-URI for future requests", Netscape has no motivation to change
> their incorrect behavior.  I am sure the same analysis could easily be made
> of all other browsers and thus it seems as if the code "302" will mostly
> likely not reach its intended level of use simply because browser designers
> are clearly allowed to handle this code in a way inconsistent with its
> intent.

but HTTP says:

> SHOULD
>     This word or the adjective "recommended" means that there may exist
>     valid reasons in particular circumstances to ignore this item, but
>     the full implications should be understood and the case carefully
>     weighed before choosing a different course.


so what are the "valid reasons"?

- Larry