both statements are suppose to let the browser / web server know that a fresh copy of the web page is required.
W3c stadnard does not define any values for the contents attribute,In my understanding value of the content is related to the webserver used.
The HTTP-EQUIV META elements are supposed to allow web authors to tinker with the HTTP response header on some servers. Some browsers also pay attention to it, but we're really talking here about the HTTP specification. And both of those are illegal values. The header is supposed to employ a valid date of a particular format and relative values are not allowed. However, the specification does state that any illegal date is to be taken to have occured sometime in the past. Which is to say that those two statements are exactly he same.
“The power of the Web is in its universality. Access by everyone regardless of disability is an essential aspect.”
—Tim Berners-Lee, W3C Director and inventor of the World Wide Web
It's not supposed to work. At least not necessarily. It's what's in the HTTP header that matters and some servers use those meta tags to adjust the HTTP header.
“The power of the Web is in its universality. Access by everyone regardless of disability is an essential aspect.”
—Tim Berners-Lee, W3C Director and inventor of the World Wide Web
HTML Goodies is a very, very bad site full of lots of incorrect and incomplete information. My advice is that you avoid it at all costs.
“The power of the Web is in its universality. Access by everyone regardless of disability is an essential aspect.”
—Tim Berners-Lee, W3C Director and inventor of the World Wide Web
Its a tough call,It could be the web server is not reading this http value ata all,in that case whatever you do is waste,
the typical value that http server should see is something like this
Expires: Tue, May 2004 17:20:00 GMT//expiration date is given
Expires: 0 //no cache intended
Pragma: no-cache
You might end up finding out that it was your webserver...So I kinda agree with charles that its one of those html things like "referer" where you are not completely independent.
Originally posted by Charles HTML Goodies is a very, very bad site full of lots of incorrect and incomplete information. My advice is that you avoid it at all costs.
[serious question]Are there any good sites out there in your opinion Charles? I regularly hear you shouting at sites, but never complimenting one![/serious question]
dave
In a world without walls and fences - who needs Windows and Gates?! - Unknown Author
"And there's Bill Gates, the...most...famous...man in the...ah...Microsoft." -- A TV commentator for the 2000 Olympics.
I am not answering on behalf of Charles. Its my personal experience speaking.
HTML goodies is nice for a beginer, as it starts simple and keeps things simple. But if you want to graduate to doing any serious web designing, HTML goodies leave a lot to be desired. I realized I had to unlearn a lot of things that I got from HTML goodies. I can't pinpoint at any right now, but I am sure there were a lot.
If you do HTMLing to make your family photos available to your grandma, HTMLgoodies is the site for you. If you want to attract potential recruiters or if you are into anything more than a only-for-my-family site, you need to learn.
I guess my dislike of HTMLgoodies stems from didn't-live-up-to-my-expectations syndrome. I have a page on my website that links to HTMLgoodies saying "This is the best site in the world". I actually thought that when I started HTMLing. And now that I understand things better than I did ca 3 years ago, I've begun to REALLY dislike HTMLgoodies.
I have found HTML Goodies to be particularly bad for beginners. It teaches a lot of stuff that is simply wrong and beginners are not going to know that it's wrong. If they ever get around to the next step they will have to unlearn everything.
I'm afraid to say that I haven't seen too many sites that are any good. HTML Goodies is, however, the worst that I've seen. But this stuff isn't rocket science. All you need to do is go to the source. Just read, mark. learn and inwardly digest:
“The power of the Web is in its universality. Access by everyone regardless of disability is an essential aspect.”
—Tim Berners-Lee, W3C Director and inventor of the World Wide Web
Charles, its not easy to read specs. Thats why tutorials are required. Did you start off HTMLing reading the specs? You dont know what to read and what not to, when you are a beginer. How will he make sense out of (for example)
<!ELEMENT UL - - (LI)+ -- unordered list -->
<!ATTLIST UL
%attrs; -- %coreattrs, %i18n, %events --
>
<!ELEMENT OL - - (LI)+ -- ordered list -->
<!ATTLIST OL
%attrs; -- %coreattrs, %i18n, %events --
>
All I am saying about is Joe Burns uses a lot of proprietary code and yes there are a lot of errors on the HTML Goodies website.
I learnt basic HTML within about half-an hour from reading a tag reference sheet and sitting with a web master for about ten minutes with a pencil and paper and he explained the basics.
The rest I taught myself for a few months then I began following the W3C Recommendations but we are talking early 1999 when Netscape 3.0 was still popular.
I guess every one is correct in what they are saying,we just have to consider this,that HTML goodies tuts were probably written in late 9dees,Heck even html did not have much in it by then, some 50+ tags may be?
It doesnt sound fair to judge that on todays knowledge...if we do that then books written on physics 100yrs ago are jokes today..lol.
The action that is debateable on HTMLGoodies behalf is that they should have updated their pages.
Differnece of this cache ...
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks