Redirect code and delay

Sometime around Sun, 02 Nov 2003 23:42:05 GMT, Wipkip is reported to have
stated:

Brett wrote:
Search engines will follow a Redirect permanent in your htaccess file
but most search engines do not like the meta refresh tags.

In fact they think meta refresh are evil.

As do many users. :-)

--
Mark Parnell
http://www.clarkecomputers.com.au

"Mark Parnell" <webmaster (AT) clarkecomputers (DOT) com.au> wrote

Sometime around Sun, 02 Nov 2003 23:42:05 GMT, Wipkip is reported to have
stated:

Brett wrote:
Search engines will follow a Redirect permanent in your htaccess file
but most search engines do not like the meta refresh tags.

In fact they think meta refresh are evil.

As do many users. :-)

What is the difference that users experience?


--
Bonnie Granat
Granat Technical Editing and Writing
http://www.granatedit.com

Sometime around Sun, 2 Nov 2003 21:40:51 -0500, Bonnie Granat is reported
to have stated:
[Meta refresh vs. server redirection]

What is the difference that users experience?

Instead of seeing a blank page with "We have moved", they just get the new
page. From the user's perspective, it is much like a meta refresh with a 0
time value. Except their back button isn't broken. I guess the downfall is
that they may not realise they are being redirected, and so may not update
their bookmarks (if they have it bookmarked).

For an example[1], go to http://stone.thecoreworlds.net/www/frames/
(redirects to http://dorward.me.uk/www/frames/).

HTH

[1] Sorry, David - just happened to remember that one. :-)

--
Mark Parnell
http://www.clarkecomputers.com.au

"Mark Parnell" <webmaster (AT) clarkecomputers (DOT) com.au> wrote

Sometime around Sun, 2 Nov 2003 21:40:51 -0500, Bonnie Granat is reported
to have stated:
[Meta refresh vs. server redirection]

What is the difference that users experience?

Instead of seeing a blank page with "We have moved", they just get the new
page. From the user's perspective, it is much like a meta refresh with a 0
time value. Except their back button isn't broken. I guess the downfall is
that they may not realise they are being redirected, and so may not update
their bookmarks (if they have it bookmarked).

For an example[1], go to http://stone.thecoreworlds.net/www/frames/
(redirects to http://dorward.me.uk/www/frames/).

My ISP had put a zero time and I changed it to 5 and put the text in there,
just precisely to alert people that the site has moved. I think I may just
leave it. The old site is going to disappear on 12-31-03 or earlier, anyway.

Thanks, Mark.


--
Bonnie Granat
Granat Technical Editing and Writing
http://www.granatedit.com

Mark Parnell wrote:

For an example[1], go to http://stone.thecoreworlds.net/www/frames/
(redirects to http://dorward.me.uk/www/frames/).

Actually... it doesn't. It redirects to http://david.us-lot.org/www/frames/
and /that/ redirects to the dorward.me.uk site. Isn't it fun spending 6
months developing a new site, then redirecting everything to the proper
domain, and then replacing the proper domain becuase .me.uk became 80%
cheaper?

[1] Sorry, David - just happened to remember that one. :-)

--
David Dorward http://dorward.me.uk/

Sometime around Mon, 03 Nov 2003 07:30:14 +0000, David Dorward is reported
to have stated:

Mark Parnell wrote:

For an example[1], go to http://stone.thecoreworlds.net/www/frames/
(redirects to http://dorward.me.uk/www/frames/).

Actually... it doesn't. It redirects to http://david.us-lot.org/www/frames/
and /that/ redirects to the dorward.me.uk site. Isn't it fun spending 6

I did know there was another layer of redirect in there, but it wasn't
really relevant to the discussion (and I couldn't remember the middle
domain). :-)

months developing a new site, then redirecting everything to the proper
domain, and then replacing the proper domain becuase .me.uk became 80%
cheaper?

Not being in the UK, I haven't ever had that happen. ;-) But it sure sounds
like fun.

--
Mark Parnell
http://www.clarkecomputers.com.au

Don't ask me why, but I decided to do the hcaccess thing, after all. Seems
the bots were finding my new site with the redirect, but I could see where
the delay is annoying to people Why have two methods of doing the same
thing, anyway?
Just wondering. But I suppose it's a question very much line, "Why don't all
browsers implement the latest specifications?"
Why *don't* they? And why are more than 85% of my visitors using MSIE 6.0?

Bonnie