Julian Reschke wrote:

Anne van Kesteren wrote:

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 (reasonably
acceptable */*), but it would be better to leave it out entirely. Also see:


It 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?

Not setting the Accept header means the same thing as setting it to "*/*" (<http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/rfc2616.html#rfc.section.14.1.p.8>), so these servers simply are buggy.

If "*/*" is semantically the same as not sending the header at all, and the former works with more servers, I would prefer that we use the former.

/ Jonas

Reply via email to