Re: Problems with code "302 Moved Temporarily"

At 5:53 AM -0700 8/7/96, Koen Holtman wrote:
>>so what are the "valid reasons"?
>Clickable maps are the valid reason.  The script processing a
>clickable map URL like http://cgi-bin/imagemap?54,32 will return a 302
>redirect to an URL like http://animals/cats/, and it makes *much* more
>sense to show and bookmark the latter as the location.  I'd be
>surprised if there were any user agent which does not bookmark the
>second URL.  If you want to bookmark the first, you have the
>additional problem of not having a title.
>I think that the only way to get `bookmark the first URL' semantics
>would be to define a completely new redirection code, or an extra
>response header which would change the currently used 302 semantics if
>(BTW, this existing practice with 302 is why I make so much fuss about
>bookmarking the right URL in section 12.2 of the transparent content
>negotiation draft.)
>>- Larry

I believe that any application which uses a "302 Moved Temporarily" code in
order to redirect the end user to a new URI with the intent they should
bookmark the new URI is broken.  If you want the end user to bookmark the
new URI you should probably be using either "301 Moved Permanently" or "303
See Other".  The code "302" description specifically says:

  Since the redirection may be altered on occasion, the client SHOULD continue
  to use the Request-URI for future requests.

This seems pretty clear that the intent is for the client to bookmark the
original Request-URI so that "future requests" will use it.


It is not because things are difficult that we do not dare; it is because
we do not dare that they are difficult. -Seneca

Received on Wednesday, 7 August 1996 17:27:14 UTC