[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: lynx-dev meaning of -cookies
From: |
Klaus Weide |
Subject: |
Re: lynx-dev meaning of -cookies |
Date: |
Thu, 4 Nov 1999 01:32:50 -0600 (CST) |
On Thu, 4 Nov 1999, Leonid Pauzner wrote:
> 3-Nov-99 14:37 Klaus Weide wrote:
> > -cookies
> > toggles handling of Set-Cookie headers.
>
> > "Set-Cookie:" is incoming. Outgoing is "Cookie:", the description doesn't
> > say anything about that.
>[...]
>
> >> There was no problem before when LYSetCookies were set once per lynx
> >> session
> >> so cookies jar was always empty when the receiving of cookies were blocked.
>
> > Is there a problem now? And what exactly is the problem?
> Form options menu say "Cookies..." one should read "Accept Cookies",
> we should check other wording around also.
Yes, it should say that (or "Accepting cookies"? or "Accepting of cookies"?).
(But note that the current wording of the 3 choices already shows
that they are about receiving cookies, not receiving & sending, IMO:
/------------\
| ignore |
| ask user |
| accept all |
\------------/
Not that it coan't be made even clearer.)
> PERSISTENT_COOKIES as it is implemented now
> seems doind a wrong (but documented) job for SET_COOKIES:FALSE,
> I have a feeling that it was not intended by the original author (RP).
> Probably I am very wrong.
Well, I think it is likely he didn't think about it...
> >> 1) add LYSetCookies check on the sending part of HTTP.c
>
> > This would change the meaning of -cookies and SET_COOKIES from
> > what is documented now.
So, so far nobody is seriously arguing for it...
Klaus