- From: Shel Kaphan <sjk@amazon.com>
- Date: Wed, 3 Jan 1996 17:28:01 -0800
- To: "David W. Morris" <dwm@shell.portal.com>
- Cc: http working group <http-wg%cuckoo.hpl.hp.com@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
David W. Morris writes: ... > Much of the confusion is induced by web page designeers who put > anchors on their pages and label them 'BACK'. They DO NOT perform a > BACK function in general they polute the history list with anouther > perhaps different copy of a document. > > To resolve this confusion we need to take some part of the WWW spec > forward to cover these additional cases such as: > 1. REDO/UNDO as explicit browser buttons which also are reported to > the server as requests which can be differentiated. > 2. Provide some HTML mechanism which allows the application > developer to place the BROWSER button functions (BACK, FWD?, > REDO/UNDO, ...) within the WEB content. Then when the author > wants to represent 'back' on the page, they have the choice > of obtaining exactly the browser button semantics without > stupid phrases like "Click the BROWSER BACK button and fix the > xxx field and resubmit". > > 3. Add via headers, response codes, methods, the ability for a > application to control the history list. As new functionality > I fully support the capabilities Brian and others have suggested > to allow building better applications using generic web browsers > by controlling the users history view. I don't believe redefining > existing expectations is a good idea. I also believe this is a > non-trivial activity. ... > Part of this issue involves the grey area between caching and session > history management which I have previously proposed as part of the > agenda for the caching sub-group. Going beyond such clarifications > seems like a longer term issue to define support for more transactional > oriented applications. > > Perhaps a candidate for a future sub-group. > > Dave Morris This is indeed a gray area -- people are hesitant to try to deal with it as part of the communication protocol, and also hesitant to deal with it as solely within the realm of a particular content-type such as HTML, because it doesn't really fit inside either box. Nonetheless I agree that much would be gained with the addition of the right set of primitives. Koen and I talked about this to some extent in http://www.amazon.com/expires-report.{html,txt}, though that doesn't address all issues. One thing I'd like to see is tags within HTML that gave hyperlinks the ability to pop the history stack (possibly by N pages) rather than link to a specific document, replace the top of the stack with the target document, go to the most recent occurrence of a document in the stack, etc. But I have seen nothing anywhere that defines the "history list" model that most browsers use. Someone could build a browser using an entirely different model -- for instance where all pages visited are remembered in an extended history tree, or where there's no concept of remembering the order of visitation at all -- and not be in violation of any standards. Leaving it wide open does keep the door open for innovation, and since we're still at the Model T stage with this stuff, that's probably good. --Shel Kaphan
Received on Wednesday, 3 January 1996 17:35:35 UTC