Without trying to start a flame war, I'll make these observations: 1. Though it may not be RFC compliant to do what it is doing, it will still work on 95%+ of the browsers in use.
2. It is only an issue if the developer has a coding error. 3. Taken together, it is extremely unlikely to happen in practice. 4. Given that it is unlikely, and that AOL's server developer resources are limited, how many resources should be used in making this change, reviewing it, testing it, etc.? I would say "not many". 5. I do think it would be a good idea to include a note in the documentation that there is this shortcoming and that it's something to keep in mind when writing code. To me, this is the reason for submitting a bug report like this, and I'd be happy with a documentation note as the solution if I had reported the problem. Jim > > I am extremely disappointed how this bug was resolved, by rejecting it. ...
