Re: Re: Browser dependent CGI script failure?

[Anonymous Monk]

Some browsers fill out the script name automatically, some don't.

Like what browser? All browsers should support this. It's a standard relative uri, perfectly legal. See http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc1738.txt http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2396.txt.

[wolfi]

uhm...
RFCs are not law - and ultimately, it is up to the browser manufacturers, whether they adhere to them or not.
(if browsers all followed the standards - webdesigners wouldn't be having as many compatibility discussions.)

[BUU]

You are using a relative URL of a form that is not strictly standard

It's a standard relative uri, perfectly legal.

[Anonymous Monk]

That's why I ask to give an example. Unless it's some homemade browser, it'll work.

[iburrell]

It is open to interpretation if it is a legal relative URI. The relativeURI grammar in RFC 2396 defines that the relative path must have at least a single character before the query string. However, the examples include '?y' as a relative URL. RFC 1808 allows just a query string and specified the resolution rules for it.