support for META refresh tag in old browsers

Discussion in 'HTML' started by Jon Berg, Apr 19, 2005.

  1. Jon Berg

    Jon Berg Guest

    Is there any place where I can get an overview of what browsers support
    the <meta http-equiv="Refresh" content="0;url=some-file.html"> tag.
    Especially very old browsers.
    Is it supported by all? Netscape 1.0?



    Jon.
    Jon Berg, Apr 19, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Jon Berg <> wrote:

    > Is there any place where I can get an overview of what browsers
    > support the <meta http-equiv="Refresh"
    > content="0;url=some-file.html"> tag. Especially very old browsers.


    There is no "support" concept, since there is no official definition of
    what the tag _means_. There is no Refresh header defined in the HTTP
    protocol, and a tag meant to simulate one is even less defined.

    Moreover, the HTML specification explicitly tells us _not_ to use
    such tags, so why would you be interested in "support" to it?

    It's also a matter of browser configuration. Browsers that do something
    with the kludge may have settings that prevent such redirections.

    > Is it supported by all? Netscape 1.0?


    Why would you care? Nobody else is probably interested, so I sent you a
    detailed list by E-mail. Sorry, deleted it after sending; hope you had
    the right address in the From field.

    --
    Yucca, http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/
    Pages about Web authoring: http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/www.html
    Jukka K. Korpela, Apr 19, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Jon Berg

    Jon Berg Guest

    I did not get any email message from you.

    You can use it as a cheap way ofdoing the 30x header responses.
    But I guess it is not promoted as a good way of doing it.

    By support I mean "does it work".



    Jukka K. Korpela wrote:
    > Jon Berg <> wrote:
    >
    >
    >>Is there any place where I can get an overview of what browsers
    >>support the <meta http-equiv="Refresh"
    >>content="0;url=some-file.html"> tag. Especially very old browsers.

    >
    >
    > There is no "support" concept, since there is no official definition of
    > what the tag _means_. There is no Refresh header defined in the HTTP
    > protocol, and a tag meant to simulate one is even less defined.
    >
    > Moreover, the HTML specification explicitly tells us _not_ to use
    > such tags, so why would you be interested in "support" to it?
    >
    > It's also a matter of browser configuration. Browsers that do something
    > with the kludge may have settings that prevent such redirections.
    >
    >
    >>Is it supported by all? Netscape 1.0?

    >
    >
    > Why would you care? Nobody else is probably interested, so I sent you a
    > detailed list by E-mail. Sorry, deleted it after sending; hope you had
    > the right address in the From field.
    >
    Jon Berg, Apr 19, 2005
    #3
  4. Jon Berg <> wrote:

    > I did not get any email message from you.
    >
    > You can use it as a cheap way ofdoing the 30x header responses.
    > But I guess it is not promoted as a good way of doing it.
    >
    > By support I mean "does it work".
    >
    >
    >
    > Jukka K. Korpela wrote:
    >> Jon Berg <> wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>>Is there any place where I can get an overview of what browsers
    >>>support the <meta http-equiv="Refresh"
    >>>content="0;url=some-file.html"> tag. Especially very old browsers.

    >>
    >>
    >> There is no "support" concept, since there is no official
    >> definition of what the tag _means_. There is no Refresh header
    >> defined in the HTTP protocol, and a tag meant to simulate one is
    >> even less defined.
    >>
    >> Moreover, the HTML specification explicitly tells us _not_ to use
    >> such tags, so why would you be interested in "support" to it?
    >>
    >> It's also a matter of browser configuration. Browsers that do
    >> something with the kludge may have settings that prevent such
    >> redirections.
    >>
    >>
    >>>Is it supported by all? Netscape 1.0?

    >>
    >>
    >> Why would you care? Nobody else is probably interested, so I sent
    >> you a detailed list by E-mail. Sorry, deleted it after sending;
    >> hope you had the right address in the From field.
    >>


    Consider getting a clue. See
    http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/usenet/dont.html

    Maybe your address in the From field _is_ forged. It looks like forged.
    Please do not fix it before you have a clue.

    --
    Yucca, http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/
    Pages about Web authoring: http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/www.html
    Jukka K. Korpela, Apr 19, 2005
    #4
  5. Jon Berg

    Jon Berg Guest

    If you remove "nospamwhatsoever-" you can send me emails.
    But I don't want stuff sent to my email.

    I think it is you that do not have a clue.

    The whole consept of newsgroup is that you post to the newsgroup and
    don't send stuff in the email.

    You should add that to your list.

    Jukka K. Korpela wrote:
    > Jon Berg <> wrote:
    >
    >
    >>I did not get any email message from you.
    >>
    >>You can use it as a cheap way ofdoing the 30x header responses.
    >>But I guess it is not promoted as a good way of doing it.
    >>
    >>By support I mean "does it work".
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>Jukka K. Korpela wrote:
    >>
    >>>Jon Berg <> wrote:
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>Is there any place where I can get an overview of what browsers
    >>>>support the <meta http-equiv="Refresh"
    >>>>content="0;url=some-file.html"> tag. Especially very old browsers.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>There is no "support" concept, since there is no official
    >>>definition of what the tag _means_. There is no Refresh header
    >>>defined in the HTTP protocol, and a tag meant to simulate one is
    >>>even less defined.
    >>>
    >>>Moreover, the HTML specification explicitly tells us _not_ to use
    >>>such tags, so why would you be interested in "support" to it?
    >>>
    >>>It's also a matter of browser configuration. Browsers that do
    >>>something with the kludge may have settings that prevent such
    >>>redirections.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>Is it supported by all? Netscape 1.0?
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>Why would you care? Nobody else is probably interested, so I sent
    >>>you a detailed list by E-mail. Sorry, deleted it after sending;
    >>>hope you had the right address in the From field.
    >>>

    >
    >
    > Consider getting a clue. See
    > http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/usenet/dont.html
    >
    > Maybe your address in the From field _is_ forged. It looks like forged.
    > Please do not fix it before you have a clue.
    >
    Jon Berg, Apr 19, 2005
    #5
  6. In article <d4315q$2jej$>, jon.berg@nospamwhatsoever-
    turtlemeat.com says...
    > Jukka K. Korpela wrote:
    > > Jon Berg <> wrote:
    > >
    > >
    > >>I did not get any email message from you.
    > >>
    > >>You can use it as a cheap way ofdoing the 30x header responses.
    > >>But I guess it is not promoted as a good way of doing it.
    > >>
    > >>By support I mean "does it work".
    > >>
    > >>
    > >>
    > >>Jukka K. Korpela wrote:
    > >>
    > >>>Jon Berg <> wrote:
    > >>>
    > >>>
    > >>>
    > >>>>Is there any place where I can get an overview of what browsers
    > >>>>support the <meta http-equiv="Refresh"
    > >>>>content="0;url=some-file.html"> tag. Especially very old browsers.
    > >>>
    > >>>
    > >>>There is no "support" concept, since there is no official
    > >>>definition of what the tag _means_. There is no Refresh header
    > >>>defined in the HTTP protocol, and a tag meant to simulate one is
    > >>>even less defined.
    > >>>
    > >>>Moreover, the HTML specification explicitly tells us _not_ to use
    > >>>such tags, so why would you be interested in "support" to it?
    > >>>
    > >>>It's also a matter of browser configuration. Browsers that do
    > >>>something with the kludge may have settings that prevent such
    > >>>redirections.
    > >>>
    > >>>
    > >>>
    > >>>>Is it supported by all? Netscape 1.0?


    > If you remove "nospamwhatsoever-" you can send me emails.
    > But I don't want stuff sent to my email.


    Whoosh!


    >
    > I think it is you that do not have a clue.


    He does, however, know how to reply to a post.

    --
    Hywel
    Hywel Jenkins, Apr 19, 2005
    #6
  7. Jon Berg

    Toby Inkster Guest

    Jon Berg wrote:

    > The whole consept of newsgroup is that you post to the newsgroup and
    > don't send stuff in the email.


    I beg to differ.

    If I have a reply that I don't think the rest of the group would benefit
    from, I could choose to take the discussion to e-mail. (Why else include a
    From field at all?)

    But if I think that other people may benefit from reading my message, I'd
    post it to the group.

    On the other side of the coin, it is rude to explicitly request that
    people reply to you by e-mail, as it implies that you can't be bothered to
    read the group yourself.

    --
    Toby A Inkster BSc (Hons) ARCS
    Contact Me ~ http://tobyinkster.co.uk/contact
    Toby Inkster, Apr 19, 2005
    #7
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. aaa
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    637
  2. shruds
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    791
    John C. Bollinger
    Jan 27, 2006
  3. Nym Pseudo

    META NAME and META HTTP-EQUIV

    Nym Pseudo, Sep 26, 2003, in forum: HTML
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    548
    =?iso-8859-1?Q?brucie?=
    Sep 26, 2003
  4. Duane Johnson

    Meta methods to govern meta data?

    Duane Johnson, Oct 25, 2005, in forum: Ruby
    Replies:
    6
    Views:
    236
    Adam Sanderson
    Oct 28, 2005
  5. Andrew May

    Canceling a 'refresh' meta tag

    Andrew May, Oct 5, 2007, in forum: Javascript
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    80
    Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn
    Oct 5, 2007
Loading...

Share This Page