At 1:53 PM 6/26/00, Quentin Smith wrote: >See below for my comments. >> Gee, this doesn't seem quite right, but maybe I've misapprehended the >> rule, as a judge once said to me :-). As I understood the original >> question, the CGI performing a server redirect wasn't responding to a >> moved or missing file, but rather has done some processing and by >> some logic has called the second CGI. I've deployed lots of CGIs that >> use dispatch tables to handle a variety of user actions, and >> sometimes a particular action is best handled by another CGI script. >> >There is no such thing as a "server redirect." All redirects are handled by >the client. Also, the message I put, "Move", does not mean anything to the >browser. I will say this: I made a mistake with the header. Instead of "HTTP >302" it should be "HTTP/1.0 301". OK, we're discussing different things. I still think the original poster wasn't trying to do a "redirect" but rather wanted to have one CGI script invoke another. My examples and discussion are about doing that, not about redirects, for which I think your advice is correct. As I cited previously: >> see page 44 >> ff. of Shishir Gundavaram's "CGI Programming on the World Wide Web", >> O'Reilly, 1996. "Server redirect" might not be technically correct as a term, but Shishir uses it in the above referenced book, perhaps to distinguish the functionality from the type you're describing. What you're describing is definitely handled by the client, as is the second example posted by David Seay, which uses the <META HTTP-EQUIV="Refresh" approach. On the other hand, David's first example is not a "redirect" by your description, but it is a valid CGI action and works just fine. Cheers. 1; -- - Bruce __Bruce_Van_Allen___bva@cruzio.com__Santa_Cruz_CA__ ==== Want to unsubscribe from this list? ==== Send mail with body "unsubscribe" to macperl-webcgi-request@macperl.org