On Tue, 13 May 2008 07:42:59 +0200, Adam Barth
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
One option is to rename the header Sec-Origin, which is already
blocked in XHR Level 1.
True, but I think Access-Control-Origin is better as it more clearly
indicates what it is related to. And since we can safely do
On Sat, 24 May 2008 10:32:03 +0200, Anne van Kesteren [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Tue, 13 May 2008 07:42:59 +0200, Adam Barth
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
One option is to rename the header Sec-Origin, which is already
blocked in XHR Level 1.
True, but I think Access-Control-Origin is better
On Thu, 15 May 2008 20:57:44 +0200, Laurens Holst
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
When invoking request.setRequestHeader('Accept', ''):
- Firefox 3b5 removes the Accept header
- Internet Explorer 8 (in IE7 mode) sends Accept: */*
- Safari 3.1.1 sends Accept:
- Opera 9.24 sends Accept: text/html,
On Fri, 16 May 2008 11:38:04 +0200, Julian Reschke [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
If you decide to keep the references, I don't see how this document can
advance. Not sure how it works in W3C land, but in IETF land you simply
can't have a normative reference to something that is work in
On Tue, 20 May 2008 14:36:06 +0200, Lachlan Hunt
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thanks. I've updated the IDL in Selectors API to use these extended
attributes now.
http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/selectors-api/#nodeselector
I think the Selectors API should just stick to the default behavior of
Anne van Kesteren wrote:
When invoking request.setRequestHeader('Accept', null):
- Firefox 3b5 removes the Accept header
- Internet Explorer 8 (in IE7 mode) sends Accept: null
- Safari 3.1.1 sends Accept: null
- Opera 9.24 sends Accept: text/html, application/xml;q=0.9,
application/xhtml+xml,
On Wed, May 21, 2008 at 3:30 PM, Ian Hickson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
* I've added a seamless= boolean attribute to iframe, which, if
the content's active document's URI has the same origin as the
container, causes the iframe to size vertically to the bounding box
of the contents, and
On 2008-05-24 10:57:03 +0200, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
It has been suggested that having an Origin header instead of
Access-Control-Origin would be useful in other contexts as
well. That browsers could always include this as it does not have
the privacy issue the Referer header has (does
On Sat, May 24, 2008 at 1:57 AM, Anne van Kesteren [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, 24 May 2008 10:32:03 +0200, Anne van Kesteren [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
It has been suggested that having an Origin header instead of
Access-Control-Origin would be useful in other contexts as well. That
On Sat, 24 May 2008 18:27:47 +0200, Julian Reschke [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Anne van Kesteren wrote:
Per the updated specification which uses Web IDL IE and Safari are
conformant here. (null and undefined are simply stringified.)
Not terrible useful, I would say. Is that something we
10 matches
Mail list logo
