- From: Brian Kelly <B.Kelly@ukoln.ac.uk>
- Date: Thu, 4 Mar 2004 14:17:21 -0000
- To: 'Jens Meiert' <jens.meiert@erde3.com>, 'James Crompton' <jc@jcrompton.de>
- Cc: www-qa@w3.org
> > Is there any alternative to using 'refresh' for those of us > who have > > our sites hosted on somone else's server? > > If you mean you don't want to use a meta or JavaScript > refresh, it depends on your provider -- most elegant is IMO a > redirect via .htaccess, but you're maybe allowed to use e.g. > a PHP redirect... Is a server-side redirect totally wihout problems? It strikes me that there are issues about the differences between a HTTP view of a Web site and a file view. This can be an issue for indexing, mirroring, etc. Also some auditing tools process redirects differently (I appreciate this may be becuase they tools are non fully HTTP 1.1 compliant). And are redicrcted pages cachable? So rather than simply saying don't use client-side redirects, use serve-side one's there may be a need to add some caveats about potential side-effects. Brian --------------------------------------- Brian Kelly UK Web Focus UKOLN University of Bath BATH BA2 7AY Email: B.Kelly@ukoln.ac.uk Web: http://www.ukoln.ac.uk/ Phone: 01225 383943 FOAF: http://www.ukoln.ac.uk/ukoln/staff/b.kelly/foaf/bkelly-foaf.xrdf For info on FOAF see http://www.ukoln.ac.uk/ukoln/staff/b.kelly/foaf/ > Regards, > Jens. > > > -- > Jens Meiert > Interface Architect > > http://meiert.com/ > >
Received on Thursday, 4 March 2004 09:20:19 UTC