- From: Brian Huisman <bhuisman@greywyvern.com>
- Date: Tue, 01 Feb 2005 21:47:04 +0000
- To: "Bjoern Hoehrmann" <derhoermi@gmx.net>
- Cc: www-qa@w3.org
On Tue, 01 Feb 2005 22:09:06 +0100, Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net> wrote: > * Brian Huisman wrote: >> I've noticed the main thrust of this page is about not "breaking" the >> back button. It might be worthy to note that a meta tag with a >> zero-second refresh time will not be indexed in the history of any >> major browser: > > Could you list these "major browsers"? I know what you're getting at, and so I'll clarify. Such a zero-second redirect *will* get stored in the history of visted pages, but not the history according to the Back button. One has to go back to NS4 to find a browser version where a zero-second redirect affects the Back button. Virtually every browser version since then accounts for it by skipping it when moving back or forward through cached pages. ... Jeez, it actually sounds like I'm defending <meta> refresh! I'd *never* use it myself, of course, since I have easy access to server-side solutions. I am only commenting on how the article conveniently uses a one-second redirect, proceeding to tell us how this ruins the Back button, when almost all of that trouble can be removed by using zero-seconds instead. I believe the focus of the article should spend more time on how a proper HTTP redirect is more easily understood by clients other than those which are primarily visual; such as search-bots, archivers, and crawlers. Brian
Received on Tuesday, 1 February 2005 23:19:00 UTC