On Monday 01 July 2002 13:38, peter lin wrote: > John Baker wrote: > > Well a reliable source tells me that there is no w3c spec for Cookies, > > and infact the concept was conjured by Netscape. There is an RFC spec for > > Cookies, but it's largely ignored. > > > > So as the useful browsers out there ignore Cookie requests without a > > path, it might be handy to add it by default so other people don't spend > > an hour or two sitting there thinking "Why doesn't this work?". The > > current context path would be handy, so the response code could look like > > this: > > http://wp.netscape.com/newsref/std/cookie_spec.html > http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2109.txt > > Too many specs to keep track of. I disagree the default should be set > to "/", since that isn't how other web/app servers handle it. I know > both websphere and weblogic follow netscapes suggestion. The spec might > be bad and probably is, but since that's how most browsers handle it, > changing might cause more problems than it solves. just my .2
Yes, "/" is bad, I think I'll forget that. The default context would be more handy, and a warning would be very handy. But most browsers don't handle it, infact, I can't find one that does (although I've only tried IE/Moz1.0/Konq). But if that collection don't handle it, any cookie sent without a path is almost totally useless. I vote a warning. Warnings are great, they save wasting time. John -- John Baker, BSc CS. Java Developer, TEAM/Slb. http://www.teamenergy.com Views expressed in this mail are my own. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
