- From: Mikko Rantalainen <mikko.rantalainen@peda.net>
- Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2012 12:24:20 +0200
- To: whatwg@lists.whatwg.org
Ian Hickson, 2012-12-17 23:30 (Europe/Helsinki): > On Tue, 11 Dec 2012, David Barrett-Kahn wrote: >> browser that the response is not to trigger the fallback entry, despite >> its response code. Something like it could be considered for > > Can you elaborate on the need for this feature? Why would you ever send > the user to a 404 page intentionally (i.e. when the server isn't broken)? > Similarly, why would you not consider the server returning 500 a good > indication that the cache should be used? I'm not sure about 404 but if the UA is able to connect the server and gets HTTP 410 Gone, I'd be pretty upset if cached offline copy would be used automatically. The server has clearly responded that the requested document is intentionally removed. End user seeing cached (stale) copy instead is very far from intented result in this case. In my opinion the UA should *always* use server returned response if server responded at all. If UA cannot connect to the server or server does not return any response in UA defined timeout, then use offline version automatically. For 4xx and 5xx online responses, perhaps provide UI to allow viewing stale offline copy instead of server response. For example, in case of Firefox, perhaps display the yellow bar at top-of-the-page saying that "An offline copy of this document is available" with a button "Show offline copy". I would be somewhat okay with 404 and 503 getting "fallback to offline copy silently" but any other response that UA receives should be used instead of offline copy. In both cases, I'd prefer being able to see the actual response. For example, a well made 503 would contain human readable information about when the service is available again. Redirecting 4xx and 5xx responses to offline copy silently would only work if a HTTP header such as Response-Origin: generic-http-server-error did exist. The idea is that if the error message is generated by Apache, IIS or some other non-application specific software, then fallback to offline copy. In all other cases, it's probably a good idea to display the server response. -- Mikko
Received on Thursday, 20 December 2012 10:24:51 UTC