Last modified: 2014-02-24 20:27:09 UTC
The 404 page used to have a meta-refresh tag. Now it apparently has a Refresh HTTP header: --- mzmcbride@gonzo:~$ curl -I "http://en.wikipedia.org/wfhsdklfjsdklfj" HTTP/1.0 404 Not Found Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2012 04:23:19 GMT Server: Apache Cache-Control: s-maxage=2678400, max-age=2678400 X-Wikimedia-Debug: prot=http:// serv=en.wikipedia.org loc=/wfhsdklfjsdklfj Refresh: 5; url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/wfhsdklfjsdklfj Content-Length: 5091 Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Age: 166 X-Cache: HIT from cp1019.eqiad.wmnet X-Cache-Lookup: HIT from cp1019.eqiad.wmnet:3128 X-Cache: MISS from cp1008.eqiad.wmnet X-Cache-Lookup: MISS from cp1008.eqiad.wmnet:80 Connection: close --- Auto-refreshes/auto-redirects like this are generally considered terrible from an accessibility standpoint. This header should simply be removed. This is kind of related to bug 17316, but not really.
Bug 17316 says > * It has a meta refresh on the client-side, which is pretty much universally > discouraged for accessibility purposes; You say > Auto-refreshes/auto-redirects like this are generally considered terrible from > an accessibility standpoint. This header should simply be removed. Neither of you pointed to the applicable guidelines.
(In reply to comment #1) > Neither of you pointed to the applicable guidelines. What's your point?
(In reply to comment #2) > (In reply to comment #1) > > Neither of you pointed to the applicable guidelines. > > What's your point? My point is that those guidelines are needed to resolve this problem. At the very least, we should have the guidelines so anyone can verify the above assertions.
(In reply to comment #3) > My point is that those guidelines are needed to resolve this problem. At the > very least, we should have the guidelines so anyone can verify the above > assertions. * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?oldid=480977530#Redirects * http://www.w3.org/TR/1999/WD-WAI-PAGEAUTH-19990226/wai-pageauth.html#tech-no-single-refresh * http://www.w3.org/TR/1999/WD-WAI-PAGEAUTH-19990226/wai-pageauth-tech.html#tech-no-single-refresh I don't really think it's necessary to re-debate what was properly decided (and deprecated) over ten years ago, but if someone would like to on this bug, I'm prepared.
That guideline says not to use meta refresh in place of HTTP redirect. ie: A redirect page with nothing on it but a meta redirect and text saying the user will be redirected. This isn't a server redirect replacement. This is a 404 page that is intended as a 404 page and includes a meta redirect to make a guess of where a user 'might' want to go. Personally I want to eventually handle 404's internally within MediaWiki.
(In reply to comment #5) > That guideline says not to use meta refresh in place of HTTP redirect. > > ie: A redirect page with nothing on it but a meta redirect and text saying the > user will be redirected. > > This isn't a server redirect replacement. This is a 404 page that is intended > as a 404 page and includes a meta redirect to make a guess of where a user > 'might' want to go. Except for what percent of users who aren't able to read the error page before being auto-redirected? The goal of the guideline was to clarify that redirects should be automatic or not, as browser control over meta-refresh tags (delayed redirects) wasn't (and still isn't) feasible. Even browsers with the ability to disable meta-refresh tags use such an obscure system that it's limited to only power-users. And it's exactly the opposite kind of user who needs to have the page displayed for a longer period of time usually. Auto-redirects are bad for accessibility. Providing a link to the possible intended target (the "guess," as you call it) is completely sufficient here, isn't it?
Interestingly, if the URL path begins with "w/" (cf. bug 54357), no "Refresh" header is output. Compare: --- mzmcbride@tools-login:~$ curl -I "http://en.wikipedia.org/o" HTTP/1.0 404 Not Found Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2013 21:30:29 GMT Server: Apache Cache-Control: s-maxage=2678400, max-age=2678400 X-Wikimedia-Debug: prot=http:// serv=en.wikipedia.org loc=/o Refresh: 5; url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/o Content-Length: 2786 Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 X-Cache: MISS from cp1007.eqiad.wmnet X-Cache-Lookup: MISS from cp1007.eqiad.wmnet:3128 X-Cache: MISS from cp1017.eqiad.wmnet X-Cache-Lookup: MISS from cp1017.eqiad.wmnet:80 Connection: close --- Here we see the "Refresh" header, confirming comment 0. Compare to: --- mzmcbride@tools-login:~$ curl -I "http://en.wikipedia.org/w/o" HTTP/1.0 404 Not Found Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2013 21:25:25 GMT Server: Apache Cache-Control: private, s-maxage=0, max-age=0, must-revalidate X-Wikimedia-Debug: prot=https:// serv=en.wikipedia.org loc=/w/o Content-Length: 2755 Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Age: 327 X-Cache: HIT from cp1020.eqiad.wmnet X-Cache-Lookup: HIT from cp1020.eqiad.wmnet:3128 X-Cache: MISS from cp1005.eqiad.wmnet X-Cache-Lookup: MISS from cp1005.eqiad.wmnet:80 Connection: close --- No "Refresh" header.
Did anyone trouble to check [[HTTP refresh]] for information regarding the reviling of them? It links to <http://www.w3.org/TR/WAI-WEBCONTENT/#gl-movement>, <http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG10-HTML-TECHS/#meta-element>, and <http://www.w3.org/QA/Tips/reback>.
