URIs identify and URLs locate; however, locators are also identifiers, so every URL is also a URI, but there are URIs which are not URLs.
Examples
This is my name, which is an identifier.
It is like a URI, but cannot be a URL, as it tells you nothing about my location or how to contact me.
In this case it also happens to identify at least 5 other people in the USA alone.
- 4914 West Bay Street, Nassau, Bahamas
This is a locator, which is an identifier for that physical location.
It is like both a URL and URI (since all URLs are URIs), and also identifies me indirectly as "resident of..".
In this case it uniquely identifies me, but that would change if I get a roommate.
I say "like" because these examples do not follow the required syntax.
Popular confusion
From Wikipedia:
In computing, a Uniform Resource Locator (URL) is a subset of the Uniform Resource Identifier (URI) that specifies where an identified resource is available and the mechanism for retrieving it. In popular usage and in many technical documents and verbal discussions it is often incorrectly used as a synonym for URI, ... [emphasis mine]
Because of this common confusion, many products and documentation incorrectly use one term instead of the other, assign their own distinction, or use them synonymously.
URNs
My name, Roger Pate, could be like a URN (Uniform Resource Name), except those are much more regulated and intended to be unique across both space and time.
Because I currently share this name with other people, it's not globally unique and would not be appropriate as a URN. However, even if no other family used this name, I'm named after my paternal grandfather, so it still wouldn't be unique across time. And even if that wasn't the case, the possibility of naming my descendants after me make this unsuitable as a URN.
URNs are different from URLs in this rigid uniqueness constraint, even though they both share the syntax of URIs.
One does not simply redirect using jQuery
jQuery is not necessary, and window.location.replace(...)
will best simulate an HTTP redirect.
window.location.replace(...)
is better than using window.location.href
, because replace()
does not keep the originating page in the session history, meaning the user won't get stuck in a never-ending back-button fiasco.
If you want to simulate someone clicking on a link, use
location.href
If you want to simulate an HTTP redirect, use location.replace
For example:
// similar behavior as an HTTP redirect
window.location.replace("http://stackoverflow.com");
// similar behavior as clicking on a link
window.location.href = "http://stackoverflow.com";
Best Answer
I personally recommend avoiding 302 if you have the choice. Many clients do not follow the spec when they encounter a 302. For temporary redirects, you should use either 303 or 307, depending on what type of behavior you want on non-GET requests. Prefer 307 to 303 unless you need the alternate behavior on POST/PUT/DELETE.