W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-talk@w3.org > May to June 1999

Re: Tracking hits without cache-busting

From: Andrew Prendergast <ap@geekz.com.au>
Date: Wed, 30 Jun 1999 13:39:15 +1000
Message-ID: <003501bec2aa$24ec5710$5901a8c0@gsd.com.au>
To: "Neil Gulati" <ngulati@scu.edu.au>, <www-talk@w3.org>

----- Original Message -----
From: Neil Gulati <ngulati@scu.edu.au>
To: <www-talk@w3.org>
Sent: Wednesday, June 30, 1999 12:56 PM
Subject: Re: Tracking hits without cache-busting


> To bring it to the point. F*** the "BACK" button. I hardly ever use it
myself, and so I
> believe users are ready to leave it behind as well. New versions of
popular browsers should
> also start to reduce it's prominence on their interfaces, too.

hahahaha you knob. So you're saying that just to satisfy the needs of a very
small number of applications out there on the web, we should all ditch our
back button? Might I remind you Eienstein that the browser's back button
avoids the overhead of an HTTP request which makes surfing a hell of a lot
faster if one rides their back button alot.

I've had a problem before with a CGI that must load a new page on every
request - just search through the http spec and set all the no-cache options
you can get your hands on, plus there are 2 meta tags you can add to the
documents themselves. The other option is to use some JavaScript to take
over the browser's back button - it works :)

I also had a problem with an image having to be re-loaded from the server
every time (for a web-counter application). The easiest way to avoid any
cache or proxy that was shoved in its way was to stick a julian date into
the URL using JavaScript (making the URL constantly change and
un-cacheable). Take a look at the HTML www.retinaplus.com wants embedded
into a page to get an idea.

Regards,

ap.
Received on Tuesday, 29 June 1999 23:40:01 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 27 October 2010 18:14:24 GMT