- From: Matthew Thomas <mpt@myrealbox.com>
- Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2004 21:50:06 +1300
On 17 Dec, 2004, at 6:08 PM, Ian Hickson wrote: > > On Fri, 17 Dec 2004, Matthew Thomas wrote: >> >> Future browsers could, instead of displaying an alert for HTTP >> authentication, provide the authentication UI in a panel at the top of >> the non-authenticated page (fixing annoying modality issues in the >> process). That wouldn't require any change to HTTP authentication >> either. > > A very interesting idea. The problem with that is that if you show the > 401 page at the moment, you'll get something like: > > 401 UNAUTHORIZED > > YOU DO NOT HAVE THE PROPER PERMISSIONS > > > > ___________________________________________________________ > Username: [_____] Password: [_______] (Login) [X] Well since I said "at the top of the non-authenticated page", and since ~70 percent of sites use Apache, most of the time it would look more like this ... ____________________________________________________________ | Committee Members Area ID: [ ] | | foo.example.org Password: [ ] ( Log In ) | |""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""| | | | AUTHENTICATION REQUIRED | : : .... which would be quite okay, since "authentication required" isn't contradicting anything. (Further, a really earnest browser might delay rendering of any unauthorized page to prevent FOUC, and then display the unauthenticated page only if it didn't contain the case-insensitive regexp "401*.unauthorized". That would be weird, but hardly weirder than Internet Explorer's current length-based overriding of server error messages.) > ... > We could get around that by saying that you can include > WWW-Authenticate headers with 200 OK responses as well (nothing in > HTTP seems to say you can't), and that if you do, then the bar is > shown as above ("interactive user agents should provide a non-modal > authentication interface"). Then, if you've already sent your > credentials and you get a 401, then you get the 401 page and the bar, > instead of the modal dialog. > ... Yes, that's a simpler option. :-) (Provided that current browsers still ask for authentication even when given a 200 OK.) -- Matthew Thomas http://mpt.net.nz/
Received on Friday, 17 December 2004 00:50:06 UTC