- From: Jonathan Stark <stark@commerce.net>
- Date: Thu, 27 Mar 1997 09:34:52 -0800 (PST)
- To: Matthew Rubenstein <ruby@name.net>
- Cc: yarong@microsoft.com, dwm@xpasc.com, http-wg@cuckoo.hpl.hp.com
quoting Matthew Rubenstein > At 02:02 PM 3/25/97 -0800, Yaron Goland wrote: > >This is an absolutely excellent idea. I think it will go a long way > >towards making content providers feel more comfortable about the cookie > >spec. > > I concur. The technique outlined below will make the association > between the user's discarding the cookie and the app's probable failure in > the cookie's absence. The message would be similar to an "Authentication > Failed", "Document Returned No Data" or "No Response From Server", > indicating a C/S failure. The "CommentURL" field also being discussed would > be helpful as a supplement. I hate to keep bringing up the same idea, but what do people think about including an alternate URL, let's call it for now a "NoCookieURL" that, if the cookie were rejected, would replace the page that wouldn't work without the cookie. There are some problems there too, but then the user could customize the response returned after a "required" (for the app to run) cookie was rejected? (So, just to try and be clear, if a page was served with a cookie and the cookie were refused, the user would instead see the page at NoCookieURL.) Same effect as NoCookie, but a little more customizable. Perhaps if NoCookie had a value, it could be interpreted as a URL, if not, it could signal one of the above mentioned errors... Just a thought... Jonathan
Received on Thursday, 27 March 1997 09:44:08 UTC