Re: lynx-dev [dev17 patch] cookie options documentation

[Klaus Weide]

On Mon, 22 Feb 1999 address@hidden wrote:

> On Sun, 21 Feb 1999, Klaus Weide wrote:
> >For one thing, I don't even know that there is a clear definition of
> >what a "session cookie" is.   The simple definition is probably "a cookie
> >without an expiration date", but that would exclude e.g. cookies with
> >expiration in the past.  And cookies with expiration date can replace
> >cookies without (and vice versa).
> 
> Well, from my recent Schwab problem (they're sending a cookie expiring
> in 1996), it seems to me that the question about "accepting an illegal cookie"
> should cover this case too.  As much as I hate to do "illegal" things, 
> if it makes me actually able to use web sites, it's good.

If the date is in the past but nothing else is wrong, there's nothing
"illegal" about it.  It's a perfectly valid way for *removing* a cookie
that the browser has (or might have): new cookie supersedes old one, then
expiration is checked and new cookie fails check, so it is removed too.

I don't know whether that cookie in the Schwab case is being used for 
this purpose or whether its expiration date is actually an error.  Are
you sure (or can you guess) that that cookie is actually one that is
*supposed to* remain set?

     Klaus