Since the other points in this thread have already been addressed by
others, I thought I'd just add my thoughts on this issue (renaming and
response header filtering).
On Tue, 11 May 2010 20:17:17 +0200, Tyler Close <[email protected]>
wrote:
On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 10:54 AM, Anne van Kesteren <[email protected]>
wrote:
I think we first need to figure out whether we want to rename headers or
not, before any draft goes to Last Call, especially if UMP wants to
remain a subset of some sorts.
AFAICT, your renaming proposal does not cover this section of CORS. I
think the two efforts can proceed in parallel. I look forward to your
feedback on this topic.
Renaming would effect how the response header is named. Keeping
consistency in the header names is important. If we decide to rename
headers it would most likely be named CORS-Expose-Headers and otherwise it
would most likely be named Access-Control-Expose-Headers.
Renaming also affects UMP in another way, namely the name of the
Access-Control-Allow-Origin header.
--
Anne van Kesteren
http://annevankesteren.nl/
