Re: Browser support for response 302 Found

Paul ([email protected])
Wed, 13 Jul 1994 10:01:37 +0100 (BST)

Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
Next message: Murray Bent: "Browser implementation of active images"
Previous message: [email protected]: "pragma no-cache -- Can we make it more useful?"
In reply to: Mark J Handel: "Browser support for response 302 Found"

@ I'm trying to write a script that will search for information, and then
@ return a a specific HTML page on my server. It seems that sending back a
@ header along the lines of:
@
@ HTTP/1.0 302 Found
@ URI: /thefilename.html
@
@ should work, but the two browsers that I've tried (MacMosaic and MacWeb)
@ both seem not to support the 302 response. Is 302 a response that many
@ browsers understand? I would find it very useful for returns from searches,
@ that don't exactly fall in the semantics of 301.

The response that the NCSA clients (and Lynx for example) understand is:

HTTP/1.0 302 Found
Location: /thefilename.html

This isnt listed in the specification but is the one that actually
works. I understand however that the move is back to the URI: header but
this will take a while to work through. The current suggestion seems to
be to send say:

HTTP/1.0 302 Found
Location: /thefilename.html
URI: /thefilename.html

Hope that helps,

Paul

.--------Paul Wain ( X.500 Project Engineer and WWW Person at Brunel)---------.
| Brunel WWW Support: [email protected] Work Email: [email protected] |
| MPhil Email (default): [email protected] (Brunel internal extn: 2391) |
| http://http2.brunel.ac.uk:8080/paul or http://http2.brunel.ac.uk/~eepgpsw |
`-------------------So much to fit in, and so little space!-------------------'

Next message: Murray Bent: "Browser implementation of active images"
Previous message: [email protected]: "pragma no-cache -- Can we make it more useful?"
In reply to: Mark J Handel: "Browser support for response 302 Found"