RE: Window-target: header (fwd)

[Brian Behlendorf <br...@hyperreal.com>]

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Sat, 6 Jan 1996 22:42:03 -0500
From: BeachNet <be...@emi.net>
To: 'Alexei Kosut' <ak...@nueva.pvt.k12.ca.us>,
    "new-httpd@hyperreal.com" <ne...@hyperreal.com>
Subject: RE: Window-target: header

Guys,

I have to agree with Alexei ... the use of Location: header causes Apache 
to swallow all preceding (to the Location: header) commands such as the 
Window-target command in this case ... I am not sure if this is intended 
design as the NCSA HTTPd, for example, allows the Window-target: tag 
through even when used along with the Location: header ....

Also, the inability to use Netscape tags such as the Window-target: tag 
makes things considerably more difficult for Apache operators such as 
myself.  I am forced to format all my HTML pages used intended for Netscape 
frames in my CGI scripts.  The Location: header would have been more than 
useful as well as convenient ....

Would you please advise on the possibility of the Apache patch to make the 
use of the Location: header and preceding tags possible?

Hoping the fix is on its way!

Bev.

----------
From: 	Alexei Kosut[SMTP:akosut@nueva.pvt.k12.ca.us]
Sent: 	Saturday, January 06, 1996 2:03 PM
To: 	new-httpd@hyperreal.com
Cc: 	beachnet@emi.net
Subject: 	Re: Window-target: header

On Fri, 5 Jan 1996, Paul Richards wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> #!/bin/sh
>
> echo -e "Window-target: MAIN \n"
> echo -e "Location: ../index.html\n\n"
> --------------------------------------------------------------------

Maybe I'm missing something, but last time I looked at sh's echo command,
it added a linefeed to the end of its output, without being told. Take
out one \n from each line, and it might behave more like you might be
expecting. In fact, then the two will act the same.

Although the Location: header, no matter which order you put it in, will
cause an internal redirect in Apache, which wipes out any headers that
the CGI script might have returned.

*snip*

> Looks a little inconsistent to me since Apache is interpreting things
> differently depending upon the order of the headers but I'm not
> sure what "correct" would be.

No, it's not. Remember that two line feeds terminates the HTTP header
area and begins the body.

--/ Alexei Kosut <ak...@nueva.pvt.k12.ca.us> /--------/ Lefler on IRC
----------------------------/ <http://www.nueva.pvt.k12.ca.us/~akosut/>
The viewpoints expressed above are entirely false, and in no way
represent Alexei Kosut nor any other person or entity. /--------------