- 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