I would like to point out that there could be other specifications out in
the wild referencing XHR 1.
This doesn't mean that you should not drop XHR 1, but would be good if the
WG prepares a (short) note that gives the background around this decision
and few info about the XHR 2 work, how it differs from XHR 1 and how to
update references. Such a note could be sent to all (relevant) WGs/IGs
and for those of us active also in groups outside W3C could be used to
inform people about the change with some "official" text
/g
On Thu, 10 Nov 2011 08:44:38 +0100, Charles McCathieNevile
<[email protected]> wrote:
On Wed, 09 Nov 2011 20:46:45 +0100, Karl Dubost <[email protected]> wrote:
ACTION-629
I found only 2 references found to XMLHttpRequest CR version (3 August
2010) [1]
Thanks for looking around.
# Resource Timing [2]
Reference to XHR in the interface
4.3 The PerformanceResourceTiming Interface
http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/WD-resource-timing-20110524/#type-xhr
Which simply declares a constant to mean "XHR" without a requirement for
any particular flavour.
# Guidelines for Web Content Transformation Proxies 1.0 [3]
4.1.3 Treatment of Requesters that are not Web browsers
Which is a note, and not under further development.
[1]: http://www.w3.org/TR/2010/CR-XMLHttpRequest-20100803
[2]: http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/WD-resource-timing-20110524/
[3]: http://www.w3.org/TR/2010/NOTE-ct-guidelines-20101026/
Cheers
Chaals
--
Giuseppe Pascale
TV & Connected Devices
Opera Software
