On Mon, Aug 11, 2008 at 3:18 AM, inforequest <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > John Campbell jcampbell1-at-gmail.com |nyphp MAIN ONE dev/internal group >>> Why is that exactly? I think I agree with you, but I just want to make >>> sure I know why 301 would be better. >>> >>> >> >> The short answer is, 301 passes google page rank, 302 does not. >> >> -John C >> > > I'm not sure page rank is an issue here, as you probably want to restrict > search engines from spidering/indexing your secure pages (especially any > shopping cart stuff that would make for meaningless duplicate junk). If > you've told the search engines that https is off-limits, then who cares what > sort of redirect you use?
But I think that's a different issue that should be dealt with using different methods (e.g. robots.txt). Someone might want crawlers under HTTPS. It's not likely. But it's possible. Conceptually a 301 means "the resource you're trying to access is actually invalid and is represented by the following resource instead". So the HTTP to HTTPS transition would be much better characterized by the 301. The 302 is better for things like redirects after form posts. For example, you might access the route /account/logon and get a valid 200 response that presents a form and then submit that to the same route and get a 302 to a different page. Mike -- Michael B Allen PHP Active Directory SPNEGO SSO http://www.ioplex.com/ _______________________________________________ New York PHP Community Talk Mailing List http://lists.nyphp.org/mailman/listinfo/talk NYPHPCon 2006 Presentations Online http://www.nyphpcon.com Show Your Participation in New York PHP http://www.nyphp.org/show_participation.php
