- From: Andrea Rendine <master.skywalker.88@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 26 Mar 2015 14:37:17 +0100
- 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