You don't actually need the ? as "extra" data will be passed in the PATH_INFO environment var and can be retrieved and used by a CGI quite easily from there. ?& is something of a contradiction in terms although I guess most CGI parsing libs would deal with it and discard the first nameless, valueless param.
In reply to Re^2: Meaning of part of a URL
by tachyon-II
in thread Meaning of part of a URL
by noob
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |