W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > April to June 2006

Re: Extension methods & XMLHttpRequest

From: Sylvain Hellegouarch <sh@defuze.org>
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 08:18:56 +0100 (BST)
Message-ID: <19213.194.221.74.7.1150096736.squirrel@mail1.webfaction.com>
To: "HTTP Working Group" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>


> That is a waste of space.  The spec should say why methods exist and
> that only known safe methods can be used without user intervention.
> (Intervention includes such things a specific configuration prior
> to running the application, not just pop-up boxes.)
> That is what HTTP and HTML already requires.  What it should not do
> is list a small set of methods and say implementations MUST (NOT)
> implement them -- that is none of your business and simply sets up
> the implementers to be fooled by unexpected extensions.
>

I agree here. However it seems the WEB-API is more interested in
documenting the choices made by browser vendors regarding issues such as
security or the way they interpret HTTP rather than producing a higher
level specification that would follow the spirit of the HTTP RFC which
would push them to modify their implementation.

Basically, I've seen a few times now some regular of the WEB-API group
saying "we've been doing that way for a while now. It works so there is no
reason to change and break implementations".

Therefore the ultimate purpose of that WG is fairly unclear to me.

- Sylvain
Received on Monday, 12 June 2006 07:19:06 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 06:49:44 GMT