W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > March 2015

Re: [whatwg] Page refresh interface

From: Andrea Rendine <master.skywalker.88@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 26 Mar 2015 14:37:17 +0100
Message-ID: <CAGxST9mS_vivWOeHiz1_Hk-LQeat8LFAyX8bgc+HuV2C1ZcKwQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: WHATWG List <whatwg@whatwg.org>
That's evidence that I'm not smart enough. I never search on StackOverflow,
I usually g***le it out.
Some fellow people who want to stop the power of <meta>, then. (the first 2
questions for sure, and even more below)
If <meta> were  changeable or removable before the refresh action is fired,
then it would become a very powerful native instrument on its own and a
useful fallback for scriptless cases (i.e. where script is not supported or
disabled). And I guess this would remove the need for a standardisation of
HTTP refresh header, which is not declared, and perhaps not evident/useful
e.g. on page caching.

2015-03-26 14:09 GMT+01:00 Simon Pieters <simonp@opera.com>:

> On Thu, 26 Mar 2015 13:11:15 +0100, Andrea Rendine <
> master.skywalker.88@gmail.com> wrote:
>  You still haven't demonstrated that anyone but you want the ability to
>>> stop a meta refresh, though.
>> I guess it's extremely difficult to demonstrate what people want to do
>> when
>> a feature is not currently available. In order to do this I should analyse
>> all the scripts containing a window.setTimeout refresh and tell whether
>> there's an event stopping the timeout (currently the only option for
>> achieving a similar result). In addition to this, I hoped someone in the
>> mailing list could tell if it's useful or not.
> Alternatively you could check stackoverflow. http://stackoverflow.com/
> search?q=stop+meta+refresh
> Would any of those benefit from being able to stop meta refresh, and
> JS-only redirect or <noscript> are not enough?
> --
> Simon Pieters
> Opera Software
Received on Thursday, 26 March 2015 13:37:45 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wednesday, 22 January 2020 17:00:29 UTC