Anne van Kesteren schreef:
On Thu, 15 May 2008 20:56:42 +0200, Laurens Holst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:Why was this changed? Why should user agents pretend that they know what kind of resource the user expects by setting an Accept header that is unreliable? FWIW, Internet Explorer and Safari set the (reasonablyacceptable */*), but it would be better to leave it out entirely. Also see:http://www.grauw.nl/blog/entry/470It was pointed out by another Last Call comment that not setting the Accept header causes servers to break. Given the results above I suppose we could require that for XMLHttpRequest purposes it is at least always set to */*. Would that work?
It would not be my preferred resolution, I like the old text better (and if possible would like to see an example of a website that breaks). But it would be acceptable.
I assume this is the thread you are talking about: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapi/2008Apr/0133.html http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapi/2008May/0137.html Thanks for your response. ~Grauw -- Ushiko-san! Kimi wa doushite, Ushiko-san nan da!! ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Laurens Holst, student, university of Utrecht, the Netherlands. Website: www.grauw.nl. Backbase employee; www.backbase.com.
begin:vcard fn:Laurens Holst n:Holst;Laurens email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED] tel;cell:(+31) 06-41765048 version:2.1 end:vcard
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
