On Wed, 30 Aug 2000 01:43:48 +1000, Ben Hood wrote:
> On 26 Aug 2000, at 18:35, Glenn McCorkle wrote:
>>>> Because this tag....
>>>> <meta HTTP-EQUIV="refresh" content="60">
>>>> is written incorrectly.
> IMHO this tag is correct.
Agree. Always, *always* assume that some lazy webmasters
relied heavily on the *default* parameters... ;-)
> This is similar to the bug that is (was?) present in
> <form>'s that didn't have an ACTION.
The bug is still exist in 1.66... :(
> AFAIK There is no correct way to interpret the meta
> http-equiv, since its not part of any HTML spec. I don't
> know enough http to tell if this is legal in the http header.
> (ie put "Refresh: 60" along with the "Content-type: text/html")
HTML *not* the same as HTTP ! Two different things !! ;)
You don't put META-refresh, in HTTP header, but in the page's
HTML header section (Altough I currently put some HTTP header
line as META tags -- the other way around ;-)
BTW, should I exclude META-refresh if the visiting browser is
Arachne? I reckon she still suffered from the nasty "spurious
redirects" syndrome. Especially when you browsing with image
autoload turned-on. Anyway, seems Arachne simply ignoring
META-refresh if you hit Esc?
--Eko
The SurvPC Network Development Team
http://survpc.net/ - Older PC and DOS Internet
http://survpc.virtualave.net/ (noframe)
