On Apr 21, 2010, at 8:57 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Wed, 21 Apr 2010 23:37:54 +0900, Mark S. Miller
<erig...@google.com> wrote:
I dislike "AnonXMLHttpRequest" because the request is not necessarily
anonymous. For example, the requestor may very well place
identifying info
in the body '{"from": "j...@example.com", ...}'.
I like constructor name already shown at <
http://dev.w3.org/2006/waf/UMP/#ump-api-name>: "UniformRequest".
Since you still work with the XMLHttpRequest object I think it
should be in the name of the constructor as well. "Uniform" doesn't
tell you much about what it is doing. "Anon" is much clearer in that
sense. The user agent will keep the request anonymous. That the
author can put identifying information on top of that is up to the
author.
I agree that "Anonymous" or "Anon" is more clear as to the purpose
than "Uniform". I understand why UMP uses that term but I don't think
it will be obvious to authors reading code.
Regards,
Maciej
