- From: Igor Clark <igor@forefrontconsulting.co.uk>
- Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2000 05:51:51 -0500 (EST)
- To: Mukul Gandhi <mgandhi@bhartitelesoft.com>
- cc: www-talk@w3.org
Hiya I think this might relate to how the php implementation of setCookie is working and what order things get done in after a page compile. You could: (a) Try using header("Set-cookie: Name=etc"); (b) Try using a Refresh header instead: Refresh: 0; URL='http://www.php.net' (c) Send an HTML document with a <script> that sets the cookie and does the redirect client-side Also, I'm not quite clear what you mean by > header statement > causes a new HTTP response to occur with fresh header and body which > contain no cookies. An HTTP response is only issued if the client makes an HTTP request. Perhaps there is a client issue - what browser are you using? Good luck, Igor. -- Igor Clark igor@forefrontconsulting.co.uk On Thu, 27 Jan 2000, Mukul Gandhi wrote: > Hello , > A PHP script must simultaneously set the cookie and should redirect to a > new page. Therefore HTTP headers from the server must go something like this - > > Set-Cookie: NAME=a,VALUE=val1; > Set-Cookie: NAME=b,VALUE=val2; > Location: http://www.w3.org; > > I am trying to do this using the code - > setCookie("a","val1"); > setCookie("b","val2"); > header("Location: http://www.php.net"); > > With this control is going to the redirected page i.e http://www.php.net > but the cookies are not getting set. But if I am ommiting the header > statement, cookies are getting set. But I want to do both the things, i.e > set cookie and redirect control to a new page. > In what sequence the headers should be sent to achieve this ? With the > combination of above 3 statements, I feel cookies never reach the client at > all(and the original HTTP response gets aborted) and header statement > causes a new HTTP response to occur with fresh header and body which > contain no cookies. > > Waiting for some response. > > best regards > -mukul > > Ps: If server side programming is done in language other than PHP, the same > concepts should apply. > > -------------------------------------------------------------- > Bharti Cellular Limited, New Delhi, India > >
Received on Friday, 28 January 2000 17:56:35 UTC