3 ms·

Pet peeve: developers assuming any 400-range code is user error. Of all the 403s and 404s I've encountered in my life, the vast majority have been the fault of

by kqr 4y ago

Pet peeve: developers assuming any 400-range code is user error. Of all the 403s and 404s I've encountered in my life, the vast majority have been the fault of the developers either running bad configurations or not committed to maintaining URLs. Stop blaming the user for mistyping when it's far more likely you accidentally changed a slug or dropped a redirect or deleted content in a migration or changed web server software without deeply verifying every link after that.

RadiozRadioz 4y ago
Indeed, it's not a user error, it's a client error.
- kqr 4y ago
  I don't think client error captures it either. The client requested the content from the correct URL. In most cases, the problem is that the server has forgot which content should be reachable from that URL.
  - Joker_vD 4y ago
    Ugh, no? It's entirely at the server's discretion as to decide which URLs are correct or not and which, if any, content should be reachable from what URL. If the server decided to forget some content, that's his right. A client may think the URL is correct, but the URL's correctness is determined entirely by the server to which URL refers. Heck, that's why the server part of the URL is actually called "authority", for this exact reason.
    - kqr 4y ago
      A URL is not an alias or directions to some place. A URL is an identifier. Identifiers and the thing being identified are supposed to be permanently linked together. It's the webmaster's responsibility to pick an identifier they think they are able to maintain in perpetuity -- anything else goes against the expectations the web is built on (permalinks, bookmarks, writing down the URL on a post-it, etc.)
      - Joker_vD 4y ago
        > Identifiers and the thing being identified are supposed to be permanently linked together. No, they are not. Where do people even get this ridiculous idea from? It sure as hell doesn't hold in practice at all, URLs (and the content thwey point to) change all the time for any number of reasons and yet I keep hearing this opinion professed over and over. Links rot, that has been reality even before HTTP existed, and it will continue because Web is decentralized and you can't force your opinion on how it should be managed on everybody.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
klysm 4y ago
It’s sometimes just not worth it to maintain links forever

by kqr 4y ago

RadiozRadioz 4y ago

Indeed, it's not a user error, it's a client error.

kqr 4y ago
I don't think client error captures it either. The client requested the content from the correct URL. In most cases, the problem is that the server has forgot which content should be reachable from that URL.
- Joker_vD 4y ago
  Ugh, no? It's entirely at the server's discretion as to decide which URLs are correct or not and which, if any, content should be reachable from what URL. If the server decided to forget some content, that's his right. A client may think the URL is correct, but the URL's correctness is determined entirely by the server to which URL refers. Heck, that's why the server part of the URL is actually called "authority", for this exact reason.
  - kqr 4y ago
    A URL is not an alias or directions to some place. A URL is an identifier. Identifiers and the thing being identified are supposed to be permanently linked together. It's the webmaster's responsibility to pick an identifier they think they are able to maintain in perpetuity -- anything else goes against the expectations the web is built on (permalinks, bookmarks, writing down the URL on a post-it, etc.)
    - Joker_vD 4y ago
      > Identifiers and the thing being identified are supposed to be permanently linked together. No, they are not. Where do people even get this ridiculous idea from? It sure as hell doesn't hold in practice at all, URLs (and the content thwey point to) change all the time for any number of reasons and yet I keep hearing this opinion professed over and over. Links rot, that has been reality even before HTTP existed, and it will continue because Web is decentralized and you can't force your opinion on how it should be managed on everybody.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

klysm 4y ago

It’s sometimes just not worth it to maintain links forever