Re: form posts expiring instantly... why?
This WebDNA talk-list message is from 2000
It keeps the original formatting.
numero = 32504
interpreted = N
texte = so unless we use get method, we're screwed?! And this is not just a beta problem, this is webcat 3.08/Linux. Given the so far apparent solutions to IE's wrong caching behaviour, I for one vote for the simple and clean hassle of adding ?no_cache=[random][random] to my links over the quickly expiring form posts!SM?-JohnPS - Peter I have NOT used any no-cache meta tagsJohn Peacock wrote:> The beta is now sending a Expires date and time, to try and keep IE from > wrongly caching pages. I have been discussing it on the beta list for > some time and Grant did acknowledge that they were still looking at the > best way to deal with it. My problem is even more severe than this; I > cannot even View Source unless I refresh and immediately select View > Source. I suggested no less than a 1 minute Expires time, though I > would actually prefer being able to decide the expiration time myself. > > John Peacock > > Peter Ostry wrote: > > > > on 31.05.2000 6:41, Kenneth Grome at ken@simplewebstores.com wrote: > > > > >>> I goto page 1 > > >>> I fill out a post form and submit it > > >>> That leads me to page 2. I click a link which goes page 3. > > >>> Then I hit the back button and I get this- > > >>> > > >>> Data Missing > > >>> > > >>> This document resulted from a POST operation and has expired from the cache. > > >>> If you wish ... > > >> > > >> > > >> Your form is POST and the following link is GET - this should not be mixed. > > >> Try to use GET in your form either. > > > > > > This is not true at all! > > > There's no reason NOT to use method=POST with every form. > > > What gives you the idea that you shouldn't use method=post? > > > > And this is again not the only truth :) > > Maybe there is some caching involved - Metatags? > > I have such a situation right on my screen: no-cache Meta's, a POST, than a > > link for further navigation and no way back. Actually it is not the mix of > > POST and GET, my explanation was not exact: it is the expired template. > > But - if I change the form method to GET, I *can* go back, Metatags or not. > > > > Peter > ------------------------------------------------------------- This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to the mailing list
. To unsubscribe, E-mail to: To switch to the DIGEST mode, E-mail to Web Archive of this list is at: http://search.smithmicro.com/
Associated Messages, from the most recent to the oldest:
so unless we use get method, we're screwed?! And this is not just a beta problem, this is webcat 3.08/Linux. Given the so far apparent solutions to IE's wrong caching behaviour, I for one vote for the simple and clean hassle of adding ?no_cache=[random][random] to my links over the quickly expiring form posts!SM?-JohnPS - Peter I have NOT used any no-cache meta tagsJohn Peacock wrote:> The beta is now sending a Expires date and time, to try and keep IE from > wrongly caching pages. I have been discussing it on the beta list for > some time and Grant did acknowledge that they were still looking at the > best way to deal with it. My problem is even more severe than this; I > cannot even View Source unless I refresh and immediately select View > Source. I suggested no less than a 1 minute Expires time, though I > would actually prefer being able to decide the expiration time myself. > > John Peacock > > Peter Ostry wrote: > > > > on 31.05.2000 6:41, Kenneth Grome at ken@simplewebstores.com wrote: > > > > >>> I goto page 1 > > >>> I fill out a post form and submit it > > >>> That leads me to page 2. I click a link which goes page 3. > > >>> Then I hit the back button and I get this- > > >>> > > >>> Data Missing > > >>> > > >>> This document resulted from a POST operation and has expired from the cache. > > >>> If you wish ... > > >> > > >> > > >> Your form is POST and the following link is GET - this should not be mixed. > > >> Try to use GET in your form either. > > > > > > This is not true at all! > > > There's no reason NOT to use method=POST with every form. > > > What gives you the idea that you shouldn't use method=post? > > > > And this is again not the only truth :) > > Maybe there is some caching involved - Metatags? > > I have such a situation right on my screen: no-cache Meta's, a POST, than a > > link for further navigation and no way back. Actually it is not the mix of > > POST and GET, my explanation was not exact: it is the expired template. > > But - if I change the form method to GET, I *can* go back, Metatags or not. > > > > Peter > ------------------------------------------------------------- This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to the mailing list . To unsubscribe, E-mail to: To switch to the DIGEST mode, E-mail to Web Archive of this list is at: http://search.smithmicro.com/
John Butler
DOWNLOAD WEBDNA NOW!
Top Articles:
Talk List
The WebDNA community talk-list is the best place to get some help: several hundred extremely proficient programmers with an excellent knowledge of WebDNA and an excellent spirit will deliver all the tips and tricks you can imagine...
Related Readings:
[WebDNA] MailChimp (2012)
What am I missing (1997)
ANother SHOWIF problem (1997)
RE:It just Does't add up!!! (1997)
BadSuffix with 2.1b3 cgi (1997)
Force a search at the default.tmpl page? (1997)
Encrypt (2000)
Snake Bites (1997)
WebCatalog can't find database (1997)
Stopping bad HTML propagation ? (1997)
Navigator 4.0 & tables (1997)
Search in 2 or more catalogs (1997)
flushdatabases (1997)
all records returned. (1997)
random prob (2003)
Database of Tax Rates? (1997)
SiteEditPro (1996)
What about that Cc and Bcc bug? (2000)
2.01 upgrade problems (1997)
RE: Renaming textA (1998)