On Thu, 12 Jun 2008, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
Note: confusingly enough our mailing list changed names. I cc'ed the new
list.
Thanks, I was not subscribed to the previous one anyway :)
On Wed, 04 Jun 2008 17:45:11 +0200, Yves Lafon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
General tone of the spec seems targeted at implementors, rather than
authors.
It would be more readable to have one part dedicated to users, and one part
dedicated to implementors.
The WG might issue a primer document aimed at authors at some later stage.
Well, having two documents would be even more confusing; Giving in the
first part of the document everything needed for authors (including parts
of "how it works under the hood" for those interested), and a second part
about all implementations requirements needed for interop would be a huge
win for authors.
<<<
If stored method case-insensitively matches CONNECT, DELETE, GET, HEAD,
OPTIONS POST, PUT, TRACE, or TRACK let stored method be the canonical
uppercase form of the matched method name.
TRACK ??? Where is the reference to that?
Just see it as a magical string the user agent has to reject. A note has been
added to clarify why it is mentioned:
http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/XMLHttpRequest/#open
Well, magic is quite scary, I'd rather have a statement explaining roughly
what TRACK is about (something non standard, not well documented, and
quite similar in functionnality to TRACE).
<<
14: If the user argument was not omitted and is not null let stored user be
user encoded using the encoding specified in the relevant authentication
scheme or UTF-8 if the scheme fails to specify an encoding.
[...]
So UTF8 is not the encoding of choice, there.
UTF-8 was a final fallback. Anyway, this has been removed leaving it up to
the authentication schemes to define this properly.
Thanks.
<<
For security reasons, these steps should be terminated if the header
argument case-insensitively matches one of the following headers:
* Accept-Charset
* Accept-Encoding
* Connection
* Content-Length
* Content-Transfer-Encoding
* Date
* Expect
* Host
* Keep-Alive
* Referer
* TE
* Trailer
* Transfer-Encoding
* Upgrade
* Via
What is the rationale to add headers and not others ?
These are headers better controlled by user agents. All others can set by the
author. The specification is now more detailed on this:
http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/XMLHttpRequest/#setrequestheader
Ok, it certainly clarifies things.
<<
Also for security reasons, these steps should be terminated if the start of
the header argument case-insensitively matches Proxy- or Sec-.
It would forbid other spec to do something fancy with Proxy-* or Sec-*
headers, why ?
This allows the introduction of headers in the future that can't be set by
XMLHttpRequest.
Yes, but why ?
* in send()
<<
If the redirect does not violate security (it is same-origin for instance)
or infinite loop precautions and the scheme is supported transparently
follow the redirect and go to the start of this step (step 8).
HTTP places requirements on the user agent regarding the preservation of
the request method and entity body during redirects, and also requires
users to be notified of certain kinds of automatic redirections.
Why not linking to those requirements ?
Because HTTP is to be fully read and understood anyway when implementing
XMLHttpRequest.
Then you don't need to restate what is already in rfc2616 and can
completely remove the last paragraph (but you know it will be dangerous
for interop, as most people won't read the whole tree of linked documents)
At least a link would help people find those requirements, no extra text
needed.
*
<<
In case of DNS errors, or other type of network errors, run the following
set of steps. This does not include HTTP responses that indicate some type
of error, such as HTTP status code 410.
[...]
Some request may be retried, like GET, especially if the targeted web site
resolves in a set of IP addresses and some of them may be down. It is
unclear that the implementation will try its best to process the request,
by retrying when needed, or if it is forbidden.
In case it is not an error it should just do what HTTP specifies.
Well, that's not how I read the list here. I see "try to connect, if it
fails -> exit in error".
Cheers,
--
Baroula que barouleras, au tiéu toujou t'entourneras.
~~Yves
