- From: Kornel Lesinski <kornel@geekhood.net>
- Date: Sun, 01 Jun 2008 14:46:09 +0100
- To: "Robert J Burns" <rob@robburns.com>
- Cc: "public-html@w3.org" <public-html@w3.org>
On Fri, 30 May 2008 10:24:08 +0100, Robert J Burns <rob@robburns.com> wrote: > On the issue of authoring misuse of 301s, is there some other litmus > test we can apply (such as consistent response headers) that could > help identify these misused 301s? If not, my inclination would be to > simply treat all of the 301s the same along with 0 timeout META > redirects (with perhaps the exception of handling some differences for > extended redirect timeouts, as Boris suggested). Google Maps uses 0 timeout in <noscript> for redirecting to static map version: <noscript><meta http-equiv=refresh content="0; URL=http://maps.google.co.uk/?ie=UTF8&ll=53.800651,-4.064941&spn=11.670476,25.202637&z=6&output=html"/></noscript> It could be problematic to switch back to JS version if <meta> was threated like 301 (and cached regardless of JS support). -- regards, Kornel Lesinski
Received on Sunday, 1 June 2008 13:48:22 UTC