HTTP 301重定向中的方案相对URI的支持程度如何 [英] How widely supported are scheme-relative URIs in HTTP 301 redirects

问题描述

我想要求 www 子域名或重定向到一个规范网址的备用顶级域名。

I want to have requests for the www subdomain or for alternate top-level domains redirected to one canonical URL.

为了避免HTTP / HTTPS问题，我认为最简单的方法是在Location头中发送一个与方案相关的URI，如下所示：

To avoid HTTP/HTTPS issues, I figured the easiest way would be to just send a scheme-relative URI in the Location header, like so:

HTTP/1.1 301 Moved Permanently
Location: //example.com/

这似乎在浏览器中运行良好，但 http://no-www.org上的玩具»验证器« / 无法正确处理。这只是一个写得不好的脚本，或者这种行为在脚本，爬虫等中实际上更常见吗？

This seems to work fine in browsers, but the toy »validator« at http://no-www.org/ does not handle it correctly. Is this just a single badly written script, or is this behavior actually more common in scripts, crawlers, etc. out there?

推荐答案

位置 预计绝对URI：

Location expects an absolute URI:

[...]字段值由一个绝对URI组成。

[…] The field value consists of a single absolute URI.

Location       = "Location" ":" absoluteURI

虽然大多数用户代理也会接受相对URI，但您应该遵守规范并提供绝对URI。

Although most user agents will also accept relative URIs, you should stick to the specification and provide an absolute URI.

这篇关于HTTP 301重定向中的方案相对URI的支持程度如何的文章就介绍到这了，希望我们推荐的答案对大家有所帮助，也希望大家多多支持IT屋！