Hi everyone, First post, be kind. I''ve been developing my first application and during testing noticed that pressing the ''back'' button didn''t trigger initialisation code contained with the action code. This mattered to me because I cache information in the session and clear it out at the end of a transaction or on a cancel. Pressing ''back'', though seemingly a cancel, causes the app to display erroneous information because the cancel processing has not happened. To get around this I have added the following to my application.rhtml file <meta http-equiv="Pragma" content="no-cache"> This prevents any pages from being cached (scriptaculous javascript pages work just fine as you''d expect) I was just wondering whether this was in fact a generic requirement and whether I should file a bug report? Has ''back'' caused anyone else grief or is it just me? Is there a railish way of coping with such user actions? Ed -- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.
worst inventions ever being made: - nuke devices + war - microsoft - browser back button> --- Ursprüngliche Nachricht --- > Von: Ed ed <ed.temp.01-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> > An: rails-1W37MKcQCpIf0INCOvqR/iCwEArCW2h5@public.gmane.org > Betreff: [Rails] Disabling the browser ''back'' button > Datum: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 18:19:53 +0100 > > Hi everyone, > > First post, be kind. > > I''ve been developing my first application and during testing noticed > that pressing the ''back'' button didn''t trigger initialisation code > contained with the action code. > > This mattered to me because I cache information in the session and clear > it out at the end of a transaction or on a cancel. Pressing ''back'', > though seemingly a cancel, causes the app to display erroneous > information because the cancel processing has not happened. > > To get around this I have added the following to my application.rhtml > file > > <meta http-equiv="Pragma" content="no-cache"> > > This prevents any pages from being cached (scriptaculous javascript > pages work just fine as you''d expect) I was just wondering whether this > was in fact a generic requirement and whether I should file a bug > report? > > Has ''back'' caused anyone else grief or is it just me? Is there a railish > way of coping with such user actions? > > Ed > > -- > Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/. > _______________________________________________ > Rails mailing list > Rails-1W37MKcQCpIf0INCOvqR/iCwEArCW2h5@public.gmane.org > http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/rails >
top 3 things i couldnt live without (tech)... rss back button osx On 17/11/2005, at 18.32, Peter Ertl wrote:> worst inventions ever being made: > > - nuke devices + war > - microsoft > - browser back button > >> --- Ursprüngliche Nachricht --- >> Von: Ed ed <ed.temp.01-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> >> An: rails-1W37MKcQCpIf0INCOvqR/iCwEArCW2h5@public.gmane.org >> Betreff: [Rails] Disabling the browser ''back'' button >> Datum: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 18:19:53 +0100 >> >> Hi everyone, >> >> First post, be kind. >> >> I''ve been developing my first application and during testing noticed >> that pressing the ''back'' button didn''t trigger initialisation code >> contained with the action code. >> >> This mattered to me because I cache information in the session and >> clear >> it out at the end of a transaction or on a cancel. Pressing ''back'', >> though seemingly a cancel, causes the app to display erroneous >> information because the cancel processing has not happened. >> >> To get around this I have added the following to my application.rhtml >> file >> >> <meta http-equiv="Pragma" content="no-cache"> >> >> This prevents any pages from being cached (scriptaculous javascript >> pages work just fine as you''d expect) I was just wondering whether >> this >> was in fact a generic requirement and whether I should file a bug >> report? >> >> Has ''back'' caused anyone else grief or is it just me? Is there a >> railish >> way of coping with such user actions? >> >> Ed >> >> -- >> Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/. >> _______________________________________________ >> Rails mailing list >> Rails-1W37MKcQCpIf0INCOvqR/iCwEArCW2h5@public.gmane.org >> http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/rails >> > _______________________________________________ > Rails mailing list > Rails-1W37MKcQCpIf0INCOvqR/iCwEArCW2h5@public.gmane.org > http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/rails
Peter Ertl wrote:> worst inventions ever being made: > > - nuke devices + war > - microsoftNot using XHR, I take it?> - browser back buttonI like the back button, so long as Web developers aren''t trying to thwart it. If I hit a wrong link (usually due to poor page design) I want to go right back where I was. Not make another page fetch, not ponder cryptic error messages, not have to figure out an escape route via the Menu From Hell, just Go Back. James
> I like the back button, so long as Web developers aren''t trying to > thwart it. If I hit a wrong link (usually due to poor page design) I > want to go right back where I was. Not make another page fetch, not > ponder cryptic error messages, not have to figure out an escape route > via the Menu From Hell, just Go Back.Quite so, but as I originally noted, it''s semantically a ''cancel'' action, but in stateful applications where cancel may do some cleaning up it causes problems. Thus, is the easiest thing to do just simply not to cache pages? Ed -- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.
When it comes to caching, dynamic page contents and bookmarkable urls
you will curse the browser as there is not simple way to sync your
desired application navigation with the controls of the browser.
ajax, even though I love it, makes it even worse.
after all, it''s doable, but a huge pain in the ass...
p.s.: I also love the back button from the point of view as a user
:-)
just to realize for some folks:
i needed this huge ***load of java code _just_ to suppress caching
of our dynamic pages and make "back" work...
// disableCaching
SimpleDateFormat f = new SimpleDateFormat("EEE, dd MMM yyyy
hh:mm:ss");
f.setTimeZone(TimeZone.getTimeZone("GMT"));
String lastModified = f.format(new java.util.Date()) + " GMT";
// set modify date to current timestamp
response.setHeader("Last-Modified", lastModified);
// set expiry to back in the past (makes us a bad candidate for caching)
response.setDateHeader("Expires", 0);
// HTTP 1.0 (disable caching)
response.setHeader("Pragma", "no-cache");
// HTTP 1.1 (disable caching of any kind)
response.setHeader("Cache-Control", "no-cache, no-store,
must-revalidate");
// HTTP 1.1 (Internet Explorer should always check)
response.addHeader("Cache-Control", "pre-check=0,
post-check=0");
> --- Ursprüngliche Nachricht ---
> Von: James Britt
<james.britt-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
> An: rails-1W37MKcQCpIf0INCOvqR/iCwEArCW2h5@public.gmane.org
> Betreff: [Rails] Re: Disabling the browser ''back'' button
> Datum: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 10:57:29 -0700
>
> Peter Ertl wrote:
> > worst inventions ever being made:
> >
> > - nuke devices + war
> > - microsoft
>
> Not using XHR, I take it?
>
>
> > - browser back button
>
>
> I like the back button, so long as Web developers aren''t trying to
> thwart it. If I hit a wrong link (usually due to poor page design) I
> want to go right back where I was. Not make another page fetch, not
> ponder cryptic error messages, not have to figure out an escape route
> via the Menu From Hell, just Go Back.
>
>
> James
>
> _______________________________________________
> Rails mailing list
> Rails-1W37MKcQCpIf0INCOvqR/iCwEArCW2h5@public.gmane.org
> http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/rails
>
Ed ed wrote:>Hi everyone, > >First post, be kind. > >I''ve been developing my first application and during testing noticed >that pressing the ''back'' button didn''t trigger initialisation code >contained with the action code. > >This mattered to me because I cache information in the session and clear >it out at the end of a transaction or on a cancel. Pressing ''back'', >though seemingly a cancel, causes the app to display erroneous >information because the cancel processing has not happened. > >To get around this I have added the following to my application.rhtml >file > > <meta http-equiv="Pragma" content="no-cache"> > >This prevents any pages from being cached (scriptaculous javascript >pages work just fine as you''d expect) >It doesn''t prevent pages from being cached. It''s a pragma. Nothing else. Don''t rely on browsers implementing this the way you think it should be implemented. The only way to be "almost" sure stuff isn''t cached is serving https.> I was just wondering whether this was in fact a generic requirement and whether I should file a bug report? > >Nope.>Has ''back'' caused anyone else grief or is it just me? Is there a railish >way of coping with such user actions? > >As far as I''m concerned, the answer is no. -- stefan