W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > January to March 2019

Re: The Refresh header is still with us

From: Yoav Weiss <yoav@yoav.ws>
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2019 05:50:37 +0100
Message-ID: <CACj=BEhQ2QZo-Nx_LMt9pavjSf2kyrnvFXHJY=F8xPSW-cYg8w@mail.gmail.com>
To: Daniel Veditz <dveditz@mozilla.com>
Cc: Daniel Stenberg <daniel@haxx.se>, "Soni L." <fakedme+http@gmail.com>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On Tue, Mar 12, 2019 at 10:24 PM Daniel Veditz <dveditz@mozilla.com> wrote:

> Smilies aside, I don't see any code that supports a Refresh: header in
> Gecko. What browsers does Soni L's code work on?
>

I see support
<https://cs.chromium.org/chromium/src/third_party/blink/renderer/core/loader/document_loader.cc?type=cs&g=0&l=924>
for this in Chromium's code (only on Documents AFAICT).

Usage
<https://www.chromestatus.com/metrics/feature/timeline/popularity/1548> of
the meta http-equiv seems rather high. I'll add similar usecounters for the
HTTP header to see what %age of traffic actually sees these headers.



>
> -Dan Veditz
>
> On Tue, Mar 12, 2019 at 2:16 PM Daniel Veditz <dveditz@mozilla.com> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Mar 12, 2019 at 2:22 AM Daniel Stenberg <daniel@haxx.se> wrote:
>>
>>> And why use a HTTP header for this, can't you just use a meta tag since
>>> you
>>> are doing a web page after all?
>>>
>>
>> Ah, but the meta tag used for this since forever is
>>   <meta http-equiv="refresh" content="0; URL=http://www.example.com/" />
>>
>> and the "http-equiv" teaches people that there MUST be an HTTP Refresh:
>> header. The spec must be wrong :-)
>> (good luck convincing web developers otherwise)
>>
>> -Dan Veditz
>>
>
Received on Wednesday, 13 March 2019 04:51:17 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 13 March 2019 04:51:19 UTC