How to navigate to new URL without new instance of browser

P

Paul E. Schoen

This is probably stupid simple, but I just want to run a script that
navigates from the web page that has just been opened to another web page
with a different URL. I would also like to have an alert appear for a short
time stating that another web page is being opened. Here is my complete
script (in links.htm):

<SCRIPT LANGUAGE="JScript">
<!--
function Load_bsnlinks()
{
open("bsnlinks.htm", "NewWindow");
}
alert("Transferring to bsnlinks.htm");
setTimeout(Load_bsnlinks, 3000);
<!-- End Script -->
</SCRIPT>

If I use the alert, it seems to pause execution until the user clicks its
OK button. Then the "links.htm" page loads, and after a short delay a new
instance of the browser appears with the "bsnlinks.htm". But I want it to
load in the original window, as if someone clicked on a link.

Sorry if this is trivial, but I checked the FAQ and found only the open()
function.

Thanks,

Paul
 
S

SAM

Le 9/22/09 8:10 PM, Paul E. Schoen a écrit :
This is probably stupid simple, but I just want to run a script that
navigates from the web page that has just been opened to another web page
with a different URL. I would also like to have an alert appear for a short
time stating that another web page is being opened. Here is my complete
script (in links.htm):

<SCRIPT LANGUAGE="JScript">
<!--
function Load_bsnlinks()
{
open("bsnlinks.htm", "NewWindow");
}
alert("Transferring to bsnlinks.htm");
setTimeout(Load_bsnlinks, 3000);
<!-- End Script -->
</SCRIPT>

If I use the alert, it seems to pause execution until the user clicks its
OK button. Then the "links.htm" page loads, and after a short delay a new
instance of the browser appears with the "bsnlinks.htm". But I want it to
load in the original window, as if someone clicked on a link.

Sorry if this is trivial, but I checked the FAQ and found only the open()
function.
Click to expand...

window.open() ! ( document.open() exists too)

location = 'myNewOtherFile.htm';
or (but I don't know the difference between both) :
location.href = 'myNewOtherFile.htm';



===== Example 1:

<script type=text/javascript">
function Load_bsnlinks(theFile)
{
if(confirm('Do you accept the transfer to : '+theFile+'?'))
setTimeout('location='+theFile, 1000);
else alert('OK. Transfer aborted.');
}
</script>
<button onclick="Load_bsnlinks('bsnlinks.htm')">
bsn links
</button>


===== Example 2:

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/strict.dtd">
<html>
<head>
<script type=text/javascript">
if(confirm('Do you accept the transfer to : '+theFile+'?'))
location = theFile;
else alert('OK. Transfer aborted.');
</script>
<title>Untitled</title>
</head>
<body>
<h1>hello</h1>
<noscript>
<p>You probably haven't your JavaScript enabled,<br>
please click that <a href="bsnlinks.htm">link</a></p>
</noscript>
<p>You've chosen to stay here... and now what can we do ?</p>
</body>
</html>



===== Example 3 (without JS) :

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/strict.dtd">
<html lang="en">
<head>
<meta http-equiv="refresh" content="3;bsnlinks.htm">
<title>Untitled</title>
</head>
<body>
<h1>refresh</h1>
<p>You'll been soon redirected to : <tt>bsnlinks.htm</tt></p>
<p>You may click that <a href="bsnlinks.htm">link</a></p>
</body>
</html>
 
P

Paul E. Schoen

Thanks for all the alternative ways to automatically forward to another web
page. I prefer the method using only HTML, so that Javascript need not be
enabled. But the example provided just refreshed the original page at the
specified interval. I found a more detailed example here:
http://www.htmlcodetutorial.com/document/index_tagsupp_4.html

Here is the final version that works for me (Note that URL= is required):

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/strict.dtd">
<html lang="en">
<head>
<meta http-equiv="refresh" content="5; URL=bsnlinks.htm">
<title>links.htm (old BSN links)</title>
</head>
<body>
<h1 align="center"><B><FONT COLOR="#ff0000">This is the old links.htm
page</font></h1>
<p align='center'>You'll been soon redirected to :
<tt>bsnlinks.htm</tt></p>
<p align='center'>You may click: <a href="bsnlinks.htm">Go To New BSN
Links</a></p>
</body>
</html>

Here is a link to the actual web page:
http://www.smart.net/~pstech/bsn/links.htm

Paul
 
E

Evertjan.

Paul E. Schoen wrote on 22 sep 2009 in comp.lang.javascript:
This is probably stupid simple, but I just want to run a script that
navigates from the web page that has just been opened to another web
page with a different URL. I would also like to have an alert appear
for a short time stating that another web page is being opened. Here
is my complete script (in links.htm):

<SCRIPT LANGUAGE="JScript">
Click to expand...

this 'language' is last century's coding,
and JScript is only the M$ name.

use

<!--
Click to expand...

same objection, do not use <--,
there is no modern browser that requires it
function Load_bsnlinks()
{
Click to expand...

Crockford "Style matters" explains that having the open { on the same
line is safer.

function Load_bsnlinks() {

open("bsnlinks.htm", "NewWindow");
Click to expand...

windows.open() is slightly safer.

"NewWindow" does not open a new window,
but a window named 'NewWindow'.

If you want to open a new window,
use '_blank' or simply leave
the target parameter empty or absent:

windows.open('bsnlinks.htm');

}
Click to expand...
alert("Transferring to bsnlinks.htm");
Click to expand...

javascript, being single threaded waits till the alert() is answered.
setTimeout(Load_bsnlinks, 3000);
Click to expand...

so the timout is not sensible.
<!-- End Script -->
Click to expand...

No need for that, see above
</SCRIPT>
Click to expand...

uppercase is alowesd, but why not echo the opening <script
If I use the alert, it seems to pause execution until the user clicks
its OK button.
Click to expand...

acording to specs.
Then the "links.htm" page loads, and after a short
delay a new instance of the browser appears with the "bsnlinks.htm".
But I want it to load in the original window, as if someone clicked on
a link.
Click to expand...

use:

window.location.href = 'bsnlinks.htm';

Sorry if this is trivial, but I checked the FAQ and found only the
open() function.
Click to expand...

It helps if you read the specs, whose urls are offered in the FAQ.

Do not use old and inappropriate scripts,
unless you thouroughly understand them
and alter them to the 21th century and to your needs.

Try:

=============================================
<b>Transferring to bsnlinks.htm</b>
<script type='text/javascript'>
window.setTimeout("window.location.href='bsnlinks.htm'",3000);
</script>
=============================================

Or do not use javascript at all:

=============================================
<meta http-equiv="refresh" content="3;url=bsnlinks.htm">
<b>Transferring to bsnlinks.htm</b>
=============================================
 
T

Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn

Stefan said:
window.open() will always (try to) open a new window. If you want to
load a new document in the current window/tab, use the |window.location|
object.
Click to expand...

Only if that does not break (backward/forward) navigation.
Browsers support assigning a URL string to the window.location object
directly; it has the same effect as assigning to its href property. The
latter is better style, IMO. The former was probably intended as a
shortcut, and can't be dropped now because it's too widely used. Anyway,
both assignments have "magical" side effects (=load a new document).
Click to expand...

The difference is, or at least was, that the `href' property of Location
instances was/is "tainted", while the `location' property of Window
instances was/is not. That means that the `location' property was/is not
subject to the Same Origin Policy, thus could/can be used for accesses that
the Policy would normally forbid.

<http://docs.sun.com/source/816-6409-10/sec.htm#1021266>

(Note: Nowadays [since JavaScript 1.4, and never in JScript or other
implementations] those host objects are no longer part of the programming
language but of the DOM implementation. However, that tainting was removed
in JavaScript 1.2 is incorrect; instead, it appears to have been enabled by
default for at least the Gecko DOM.)
<script type="text/javascript">
Click to expand...
[typo fixed]

@paul: This is the correct way to open a script tag.
Click to expand...

It is the _start tag_ of a script _element_. The element is _started_, not
opened, and _ended_ (with an end tag), not closed. (When I started Web
development, I did that one wrong, too. Some kind people pointed me to the
Specification then.)

The language attribute is obsolete,
Click to expand...

No, it is _deprecated_ in HTML, which is different (declared for
Transitional variants, not so for Strict variants). If it was *obsolete*
already, the current HTML Specification (4.01) would not define it at all.
IOW: the terms "deprecated" and "obsolete" must be set in relation to a
specific version of a specific markup language.
language="JScript" will only work in Internet Explorer
Click to expand...

No, it is going to work in all MSHTML-based browsers, but probably not many
others (so not in Gecko-based ones, like Firefox/Iceweasel).
(an unnecessary restriction in your case),
Click to expand...

Yes, it is at least unwise and of course invalid without the `type' attribute.
and element names are usually written in lower-case (today).
Click to expand...

,-<http://www.flightlab.com/~joe/sgml/faq-not.txt>
|
| Q. How do I get the current element name in XSLT?
|
| A. That's element *type* name, dammit!

It is not a requirement as element _type names_ are case-insensitive in
HTML, but it helps compression (e.g., with `Transfer-Encoding: gzip', or on
a compressed server filesystem) as lowercase letters are prevalent in
Latin-based texts, thus usually compress better than equivalent uppercase
letters. It also helps migration to XHTML where lowercase element type
names and attribute names are required (which is what you might mean by
referring to "today"; keep in mind though that XHTML support is still not
prevalent in user agents -- most notably IE/MSHTML does not support it --,
and that XHTML 2 development was recently reduced/suspended by W3C in favor
of development of HTML 5.)
@Paul: A (not so minor) nitpick: lose the HTML comments inside your
script. The way you use them makes your HTML invalid,
Click to expand...

No, evidently it doesn't. The reason is that the content of the *HTML*
`script' element is declared CDATA, not PCDATA. So it is not parsed (except
of the `</' [ETAGO delimiter] which ends the element content). Just run it
through <http://validator.w3.org/> to see for yourself.

It would be syntactically invalid script and XHTML code, of course.
and the times where scripts had to be hidden from the browser are long gone.
Click to expand...

Definitely. HTML 3.2, which introduced the `script' element and mandates
that user agents should hide the element's content dates back to 1997-01 CE.
<script type="text/javascript">
function loadBSNLinks () {
document.getElementById("linkMsg").style.display = "block";
window.setTimeout("window.location.href = 'bsnlinks.htm'", 1000);
}
</script>

<button onclick="loadBSNLinks()">try it</button>

<div id="linkMsg" style="display:none">
Transferring to bsnlinks.htm
</div>


Set the styles for the linkMsg element so that it appears as a pseudo-alert.
Click to expand...

The whole idea of the OP is utter nonsense already, and should not be
supported by posting bogus solutions. There has been no real problem
presented to be solved to begin with, and the Web is *haunted* by the
results of such inept attempts at seemingly improving usability, thereby
effectively reducing it, already.

In this case, there is no good reason to force the user to wait one second
before navigating elsewhere. Do you really think they bought a fast
computer to let it show someone's wait message?


PointedEars
 
T

Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn

Stefan said:
AFAIK, JScript lives in jscript.dll, not mshtml.dll.
Click to expand...

Regardless, the layout engine's markup parser is required in order to
recognize code that should be passed to a script engine. And I have yet to
see a distribution of MSHTML that comes without JScript support. While that
should go without saying, consider language="VBScript" and think about what
would be necessary in order to invoke vbscript.dll in a Web browser
(component) then.
We don't know why he wanted to display the message. Maybe there's a good
reason for it, maybe there isn't.
Click to expand...

The OP, his history here, his script-kiddy-ish wording and source code is a
strong indication to some that there is not a good reason, just a desire to
do something fancy.
This group is about JavaScript, not UI design;
Click to expand...

This newsgroup is about providing the best solutions possible when the
problem is related to client-side scripting, and about discussing possible
mistakes when looking for one. And, if I may say so, as a newbie here you
are not really in a position to make an informed judgment about what is and
is not on-topic here. Regardless, the FAQ and archives provide enough hints.
I merely provided a working version of his earlier attempt.
Click to expand...

For suitable values of "working".


PointedEars
 
T

Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn

Thomas said:
This newsgroup is about providing the best solutions possible when the
problem is related to client-side scripting,
Click to expand...

JFTR: ... and server-side ECMAScript-based scripting of course, but
ECMAScript implementations are undoubtedly prevalent on the client side.
and about discussing possible mistakes when looking for one. And, if I
may say so, as a newbie here you are not really in a position to make an
informed judgment about what is and is not on-topic here. Regardless,
the FAQ and archives provide enough hints.
[...]
Click to expand...


PointedEars
 
P

Paul E. Schoen

Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn said:
The OP, his history here, his script-kiddy-ish wording and source code is
a
strong indication to some that there is not a good reason, just a desire
to
do something fancy.
Click to expand...

I am admittedly a newbie in JavaScript and it is only a very small part of
the skill set I use for my professional and personal needs. My purpose for
this was to fix a broken link that someone apparently has on their website,
which points to my old links.htm page rather than the newer bsnlinks.htm.
So I wanted to alert the user to the fact that this link was no longer
valid, and then forward them to the correct page. If I did not include a
delay, the new web page would appear almost immediately, and they would not
know that their link was broken. I did not know that this could be done
even better using just the HTML META refresh method, which does not require
JavaScript at all.

I am grateful to those who pointed me in the right direction so I could
provide the best solution. I am not looking to do anything fancy, although
it is good to have the knowledge to do so. But I do feel that it is
disrespectful and supercilious of you to make the assumptions and
accusations above. You may be an expert in this field, but your social
skills could use a little polish.

Paul
 
T

Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn

Paul said:
I am admittedly a newbie in JavaScript and it is only a very small part of
the skill set I use for my professional and personal needs. My purpose for
this was to fix a broken link that someone apparently has on their website,
which points to my old links.htm page rather than the newer bsnlinks.htm.
Click to expand...

So you set up a *server-side* redirect. You definitely do not use scripting
or HTML or any other client-side means for that.
So I wanted to alert the user to the fact that this link was no longer
valid, and then forward them to the correct page. If I did not include a
delay, the new web page would appear almost immediately, and they would not
know that their link was broken. I did not know that this could be done
even better using just the HTML META refresh method, which does not require
JavaScript at all.
Click to expand...

How can it be better when it breaks the Back button
[Rubbish snipped] You may be an expert in this field, but your social
skills could use a little polish.
Click to expand...

Pot, kettle, black. This is _not_ a support forum.

<http://jibbering.com/faq/#posting> pp.


I'd say "Score adjusted" if that was not already done.

PointedEars
 
S

SAM

Le 9/25/09 4:08 PM, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn a écrit :
So you set up a *server-side* redirect. You definitely do not use scripting
or HTML or any other client-side means for that.
Click to expand...

Non, je ne suis pas d'accord ! !

I don't agree with you, even if this possibility could be studied and
used, supposing the "webmaster" is allowed to access to the server.
Does that will correct the bookmark of the visitor ?
(if he came on that no more existing page, wasn't it because he used a
wrong bookmark? I think to offer him a possibility to know that this
bookmark is wrong and to correct it is not a so bad idea).
How can it be better when it breaks the Back button
Click to expand...

pfffft !

The guy certainly came on this page hitting one of his bookmarks that is
out of date, what he has to do with a back button ?

Anyway I do not understand your idea of no more back button.
The back-button seems to jump over the refreshing page, is it really
serious doctor ?

[Rubbish snipped] You may be an expert in this field, but your social
skills could use a little polish.
Click to expand...

Pot, kettle, black. This is _not_ a support forum.
Click to expand...

Yes, it can be, why not.
Or is it forbidden in a rule, or in a law, somewhere?
 
P

Paul E. Schoen

SAM said:
Le 9/25/09 4:08 PM, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn a écrit :

Non, je ne suis pas d'accord ! !

I don't agree with you, even if this possibility could be studied and
used, supposing the "webmaster" is allowed to access to the server.
Does that will correct the bookmark of the visitor ?
(if he came on that no more existing page, wasn't it because he used a
wrong bookmark? I think to offer him a possibility to know that this
bookmark is wrong and to correct it is not a so bad idea).
Click to expand...

That's what I thought. I could figure out how to make a server side
"shortcut" so that the links.htm redirects to bsnlinks.htm, but that won't
do what I want and it involves getting involved with Linux.

pfffft !

The guy certainly came on this page hitting one of his bookmarks that is
out of date, what he has to do with a back button ?

Anyway I do not understand your idea of no more back button.
The back-button seems to jump over the refreshing page, is it really
serious doctor ?
Click to expand...

When I tested it, the back button goes to the links.htm and then redirects
back to the bsnlinks.htm. If I click it twice it goes to the page before
that. So it certainly has not broken the back button. It does *exactly*
what I wanted it to do.

[Rubbish snipped] You may be an expert in this field, but your social
skills could use a little polish.
Click to expand...

Pot, kettle, black. This is _not_ a support forum.
Click to expand...

Yes, it can be, why not.
Or is it forbidden in a rule, or in a law, somewhere?
Click to expand...

Of course, if I knew that this could be done without script using HTML, I
would have asked on the appropriate forum. And IMHO newsgroups have always
been for support. Most of the OPs are from people having problems and they
get guidance and expert advice. Followup posts provide information or
become a discussion. I was grateful for the help offered and I showed the
final solution. All done with proper netiquette. And my social skills are
quite healthy, unlike those of the resident Vulcan who purposefully
represses any human feelings or emotions. PBK indeed. I say, judge not,
lest ye be judged...

Paul
 
O

Osmo Saarikumpu

SAM kirjoitti:
I don't agree with you, even if this possibility could be studied and
used, supposing the "webmaster" is allowed to access to the server.
Click to expand...

No matter. The Rule is: if there is the option of doing a redirect
server side, then it remains as the only option.
Does that will correct the bookmark of the visitor ?
Click to expand...

It does not have to. Bookmark or link, does not matter, works like a charm.
(if he came on that no more existing page, wasn't it because he used a
wrong bookmark? I think to offer him a possibility to know that this
bookmark is wrong and to correct it is not a so bad idea).
Click to expand...

Well, a non existing page (broken URL) is no option at all. What about a
page stating that somebody messed up with a link to the new location?
The guy certainly came on this page hitting one of his bookmarks that is
out of date, what he has to do with a back button ?
Click to expand...

Maybe he would want to navigate backwards through history? Why do you
think the browsers provide this functionality?
Anyway I do not understand your idea of no more back button.
The back-button seems to jump over the refreshing page, is it really
serious doctor ?
Click to expand...

Which browser, which page? Anyways it's serious alright and it's called
breaking the back button. See:

http://www.useit.com/alertbox/990530.html

Sum: immediate or relatively fast redirects that create a new history
entry are at best annoying, at worst disorienting.

To get a little bit on topic: if server side is not an option,
window.location.replace would be better than meta refresh, as it does
not create a new history entry.
 
T

Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn

Osmo said:
SAM kirjoitti:

No matter. The Rule is: if there is the option of doing a redirect
server side, then it remains as the only option.
Click to expand...

Whereas redirect should include rewrite here, don't you think?
It does not have to. Bookmark or link, does not matter, works like a charm.
Click to expand...

And the redirection can be done in a way -- even transparently with regard
to the displayed URI -- that the user is notified on the resource they are
redirected to that their bookmark or link should be updated. BTDT.
Well, a non existing page (broken URL) is no option at all. What about a
page stating that somebody messed up with a link to the new location?
Click to expand...

Actually, HTTP intentionally provides the 410 Gone response status code for
that, so it is an option (but obviously seldom the best one). Apache
supports that so that you can redirect to a document which could explain why
the resource is gone (`ErrorDocument 410 gone-for-good', `Redirect gone
foo.html'). This should be reserved for exceptional cases, though.
To get a little bit on topic: if server side is not an option,
window.location.replace would be better than meta refresh, as it does
not create a new history entry.
Click to expand...

True, but of course it would require sufficient client-side script and DOM
support. Immediate redirect for one group of users and another one forced
to click a link again does not sound very accessible to me. By contrast,
the server-side approach works everywhere and always.


PointedEars
 
T

Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn

Paul said:
I could figure out how to make a server side
"shortcut" so that the links.htm redirects to bsnlinks.htm, but that won't
do what I want and it involves getting involved with Linux.
Click to expand...

Not necessarily. It involves getting to know the server that you are using,
of course (probably Apache). You should consider that to be a good thing as
you could be making the next step in the learning curve. What exactly are
you afraid of?
When I tested it, the back button goes to the links.htm and then redirects
back to the bsnlinks.htm.
Click to expand...

And you think that is acceptable to a user, to navigate somewhere without
being asked? Think again.
If I click it twice it goes to the page before that.
Click to expand...

It depends on how fast your visitors can click twice. Surely you can see that.
So it certainly has not broken the back button. It does *exactly*
what I wanted it to do.
Click to expand...

In the browsers that you have tested with, which were ... one, Internet
Explorer on Microsoft Windows? Test it in Opera, where support for this
proprietary feature can be disabled per user preference (and isn't it
disabled by default there, Lasse?). It stands to reason that other browsers
are going to or have already adopted setting the corresponding user
preference, or that there are extensions to augment browsers with that behavior.
[Rubbish snipped] You may be an expert in this field, but your social
skills could use a little polish.
Pot, kettle, black. This is _not_ a support forum.
Click to expand...
Yes, it can be, why not.
Or is it forbidden in a rule, or in a law, somewhere?
Click to expand...

Of course, if I knew that this could be done without script using HTML,
Click to expand...

But it cannot, and should not be done with any client-side means either.
The earlier you understand that, the earlier you are going to stop being
considered just a script-kiddie as you will be publishing a quality Web
site that *really* benefits your visitors (and in the end, you).

<http://www.w3.org/QA/Tips/>

(You should follow the third link in the list, but consider all of them.)


PointedEars
 
D

Dr J R Stockton

REPOST :

In comp.lang.javascript message <[email protected]>, Fri,
25 Sep 2009 16:08:41 said:
[Rubbish snipped] You may be an expert in this field, but your social
skills could use a little polish.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

A gross underestimate.
Pot, kettle, black. This is _not_ a support forum.
Click to expand...

It is what the majority of its users want it to be; that does not
include you. Please emulate your older namesake.

(Vg ehaf vagb gur Euvar, nppbeqvat gb Jvxvcrqvn.)
 
S

SAM

Le 9/26/09 7:24 PM, Osmo Saarikumpu a écrit :
SAM kirjoitti:


No matter. The Rule is: if there is the option of doing a redirect
server side, then it remains as the only option.
Click to expand...

No, seriously, in regard to the purpose : tell the page has moved
I can't follow you on this way '*the* rule is'.
It does not have to. Bookmark or link, does not matter, works like a charm.
Click to expand...

I don't say the contrary, however
I've a lot of bookmarks like that pointing now nowhere or (by chance ?)
redirected to the 404 and some of them to a page more useful.
In case my wrong old bookmark is immediately redirected to the correct
new page, my own reference is still false. If I'm not too attentive I'll
not think to change this bookmark. (I say 'I' but, he, we ...)
Well, a non existing page (broken URL) is no option at all. What about a
page stating that somebody messed up with a link to the new location?
Click to expand...

Sorry, here my english is too poor to be sure of what you mean.
Maybe he would want to navigate backwards through history? Why do you
think the browsers provide this functionality?
Click to expand...

I don't know, since browsers have tabs I rarely use yet that. ;-)
Which browser, which page? Anyways it's serious alright and it's called
breaking the back button. See:
Click to expand...

I tested with pages made for that and Firefox, at the back and the
recommencement forward, has purely ignored the refresh page which
nevertheless had a timeout.
This time I tried with :
- Safary : don't jump over the refresh page on back/forward buttons,
passing back in both direction it doesn't load the file,
just display it and without refreshing.
(I think now IE does it, not reload the page where we come back)
- Opera : does exactly as Firefox
http://www.useit.com/alertbox/990530.html
Click to expand...

In points 1 and 2 they speak about :
- refresh *without* delay, that was not retained here
- new window, which has not more been mentioned here.
(and then ? that doesn't close the previous one, no ?)
- that history of back button breaking history
seems to me the history of the past
(if it ever was true for browsers !IE)
Following points : OK
Sum: immediate or relatively fast redirects that create a new history
entry are at best annoying, at worst disorienting.
Click to expand...

That doesn't seem to create a *new* history in browsers I use.
To get a little bit on topic: if server side is not an option,
window.location.replace would be better than meta refresh, as it does
not create a new history entry.
Click to expand...

OK, perhaps to keep in mind.
 
T

Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn

Hans-Georg Michna said:
It also means getting involved with the Apache rewrite module on
many servers,
Click to expand...

FUD. Simple redirects, which suffice for this case, can be done with the
`Redirect' and `RedirectMatch' directives.
and that thing is about the ugliest piece of code I know.
Click to expand...

How fortunate then that you really don't know what you are talking about.
And I do know, my own Apache rewrite scripts are kind of
long and rather complex.
Click to expand...

How interesting, given that URL rewrite does not require any kind of script;
the most simple case requires only two directives,

RewriteEngine On
RewriteRule ...
Can't say that I really like that thing.
Click to expand...

Evidently because you are using it wrong.
Pro meta redirect ...
Click to expand...

On what grounds? That it was better supported, that was more accessible,
that it was more flexible than server-side redirection? Because *none* of
that applies.
I keep hearing this advice, don't use the meta redirect in HTML,
use server redirects instead. But that advice is unrealistic
even for me, although I do have root access to my server.
Click to expand...

Your apparent inability to learn does not mean all other people must be
equally stupid.
It is just too awkward to fiddle with Apache conf files on a running
server,
Click to expand...

FUD. The responsible Web developer tests on a local Web server with similar
configuration than the remote one, and modifies the remote server
configuration (with .htaccess or different) only after the tests have showed
that the new configuration works. Then again, the responsible developer,
after doing so several times, is wise enough to implement changes on the
server-side without testing, without fouling up the server configuration.
And, of course, it can also be done in JavaScript.
Click to expand...

Apparently you have not paid attention. That thesis has already been
disproved for the general case, the Web.


PointedEars
 
P

Paul E. Schoen

Hans-Georg Michna said:
It also means getting involved with the Apache rewrite module on
many servers, and that thing is about the ugliest piece of code
I know. And I do know, my own Apache rewrite scripts are kind of
long and rather complex. Can't say that I really like that
thing.
Click to expand...

I really don't have the skills to mess around with server side scripts and
I am not sufficiently motivated to delve into that. I looked at Perl and
that seemed daunting enough to stay away. And I don't know how to implement
the `Redirect' and `RedirectMatch' directives as suggested by TPE, or
'RewriteEngine On' and 'RewriteRule ...'
Pro meta redirect ...

I keep hearing this advice, don't use the meta redirect in HTML,
use server redirects instead. But that advice is unrealistic
even for me, although I do have root access to my server. It is
just too awkward to fiddle with Apache conf files on a running
server, possibly blocking whole web sites because of a minuscule
mistake, not to mention web site operators who have no access to
the conf files.

The meta redirects are exactly what most small-scale operators
want and need. I believe they are a continuous favorite, whether
we like it or not.
Click to expand...

The META refresh method works exactly as I wish, at least for IE7. In
Firefox the page with the meta forwarding seems to be skipped in the
history and the back button just skips over it. That is also perfectly
acceptable behavior. This entire discussion is quite academic anyway, as
this page is on a website that I only maintain for historical purposes, and
I only knew about the incorrect link because someone emailed me that a link
on that page was broken. If you care to see the website, go to
www.bsn1.org, and the link there points to bsnlinks.htm. There may be
another website or someone may have stored a favorites URL with the old
http://www.smart.net/~pstech/bsn/links.htm

And, of course, it can also be done in JavaScript.
Click to expand...

But that means the user must have JavaScript enabled and probably would
need to accept running scripts on the page, which they may not want to do
because of security risks. I really though this thread would end when I
accepted the advice to use the META refresh redirection as my best option.
Leave it to TPE to find fault with it.

Thanks for the educational discussion and support of the method I chose as
most expedient.

Paul
 
O

Osmo Saarikumpu

Richard Cornford kirjoitti:
On IE, under 'Internet Options' -> 'Security tab' -> (Any/All zone(es))
-> Custom Level... -> 'Miscellaneous' section, there is an entry entitle
"Allow META REFRESH" with the options "Enable" and "Disable". So META
refresh is something else that can be disabled for 'security reasons'.
And I would bet that META refresh does not 'work' "exactly as I wish" on
IE 7 (or any other version) when it is disabled.
Click to expand...

And Opera (at least my v. 9) has an option to enable/disable "automatic
redirection" (Preferences --> Advanced --> Network), which affects only
meta refreshes (not JS location replacement).
 
T

Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn

Osmo said:
Richard Cornford kirjoitti:

And Opera (at least my v. 9) has an option to enable/disable "automatic
redirection" (Preferences --> Advanced --> Network), which affects only
meta refreshes (not JS location replacement).
Click to expand...

That's what I meant :)

As you are an Opera user: I'm curious, was it disabled by default?


PointedEars
 

Ask a Question

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

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.

Ask a Question

Similar Threads

How to bind data of mysql from existing iframe into a new iframe on the same webpage 1
Trying to access hdml from an open browser using Python. 1
JavaScript: how to keep track of the circle in canvas on specific path? 0
I want to have a button in a web page with action for open new phone contact page and fill it with some date 1
how to convert url with query string to url without query string 1
How to use PDF-lib and how to center each line of texts on the page? 1
how to get url of script 8
New to Javascript: How can I automate interaction between framecontents from different domains? 1

Members online

No members online now.
Total: 26 (members: 1, guests: 25)
Robots: 320

Forum statistics

Threads
473,755
Messages
2,569,536
Members
45,009
Latest member
GidgetGamb

Latest Threads

Top