Some comments on the post:
First I do not think we need special markup for this. Analytics tools will
trigger this programatically. I am however not sure whether the update
handler would really work. It does not solve the problem of the cancelled
XHR requests. It will also not be enough to just
Anne,
Some more details that should help to clarify:
You are right we would not need any progress events and you are also
typically not interested in the response. The server should normally reply
only with a no content reply. Conceptually this reply would not be needed,
however, HTTP requires
I think CORS might still be needed as the data is not necessarily posted to the
origin server. The name unloadRequest might be a bit misleading as this
functionality might be used in a non unload situation as well. I also agree on
the script-only capability.
// Alois
From: Dave Methvin
On 2/14/13 11:04 AM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@annevk.nl wrote:
On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 9:55 AM, Reitbauer, Alois
alois.reitba...@compuware.com wrote:
You are right we would not need any progress events and you are also
typically not interested in the response. The server should normally
reply
What exactly do you mean by failed. Was nobody interested in it?
On 2/14/13 1:34 PM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@annevk.nl wrote:
On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 12:28 PM, Reitbauer, Alois
alois.reitba...@compuware.com wrote:
I do not see how this relates to the ping. If I understand the Ping
correctly
From: Jatinder Mann [jm...@microsoft.com]
Sent: Saturday, February 16, 2013 12:50 AM
To: Anne van Kesteren; Reitbauer, Alois
Cc: public-webapps@w3.org
Subject: RE: Beacon API
I worry that overloading the ping attribute here may cause confusion and may
not be well adopted
Kesteren ann...@annevk.nl wrote:
On Sat, Feb 16, 2013 at 11:36 AM, Reitbauer, Alois
alois.reitba...@compuware.com wrote:
The conversations this week were very helpful in deciding how to move
forward. I second Jatinder's idea that we come up with a specification
that describes in details what we
