Mailing List Archive

> I noticed that you used X- on the FAILED vars. Do we want to make that the
> standard?
>
> I've decided NCSA needs the FAILED ones as well (its a sight easier both
> for me to code and to write scripts for), and I'm wondering if we need
> to put the X-, or shall we come ot a consensus here for something else.

the X marks it as non-standard, now if we want to make it a standard,
we'll need a new name.

Instead of X_FAILED_ maybe we need REDIRECTED_
I was thinking that if one redirects to a script (without
first hitting an error/problem), it might be useful to have this
info at hand. Since custom error responses work like a redirect,
I guess the ideas will be the same.

Introducing a REDIRECTED_ prefixed set of new CGI vars will need to
be acceptable to other server writers.

REDIRECTED_* would have to be added to the CGI spec as an optional
set of variables that the server *might* give a CGI script to help
it trace its origin.

comments ?

robh

> I noticed that you used X- on the FAILED vars. Do we want to make that the
> standard?

Never, ever, include an X-anything in software that has any possibility
of being distributed outside your own office. They are the plague of
Internet standards.

....Roy T. Fielding Department of ICS, University of California, Irvine USA
<fielding@ics.uci.edu>
<URL:http://www.ics.uci.edu/dir/grad/Software/fielding>

>
> So Roy doesn't want to see "X_FAILED" being used. I suggested
> REDIRECT_ but there was no reaction to that.
> I'm going to change 0.4's X_FAILED to something better, the choice
> is now
>
>
> REDIRECTED_
> ORIGINAL_
> PREVIOUS_
> WAS_
> FORMER_
>
>
> any preferences ?
>

I prefer REDIRECT_

So Roy doesn't want to see "X_FAILED" being used. I suggested
REDIRECT_ but there was no reaction to that.
I'm going to change 0.4's X_FAILED to something better, the choice
is now


REDIRECTED_
ORIGINAL_
PREVIOUS_
WAS_
FORMER_


any preferences ?