> This looks more like a thing to do after a 301 response to me.
> RFC2068 says for 301:
>
> The requested resource has been assigned a new permanent URI and any
> future references to this resource SHOULD be done using one of the
> returned URIs. Clients with link editing capabilities SHOULD
> automatically re-link references to the Request-URI to one or more of
> the new references returned by the server, where possible.
>
> For 302 RFC says:
>
> The requested resource resides temporarily under a different URI.
> Since the redirection may be altered on occasion, the client SHOULD
> continue to use the Request-URI for future requests.
I'm pragmatic. If you are to convince me to make this distinction, then
you have to convince webmasters to use status 302 in a sensible way first.
I don't want my discovery databases filled up with duplicates and
rubbish.
Sigfrid
_________________________________________________
This messages was sent by the robots mailing list. To unsubscribe, send mail
to robots-request@webcrawler.com with the word "unsubscribe" in the body.
For more info see http://info.webcrawler.com/mak/projects/robots/robots.html