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

Re: Extension methods & XMLHttpRequest

From: Stefan Eissing <stefan.eissing@greenbytes.de>
Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2006 10:07:09 +0200
Message-Id: <CFEFF628-B45D-437A-8DF3-B1B1FF45DBAF@greenbytes.de>
Cc: "HTTP Working Group" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
To: sh@defuze.org


Am 13.06.2006 um 09:53 schrieb Sylvain Hellegouarch:

>
>
>>> How do we draw a useful line between what counts as a user
>>> interaction, and allowing "web applications" a rich set of  
>>> interaction
>>> methods which do count as user interactions for this purpose?
>>>
>>> If it's to be specified, be careful, as the Firefox folks had a few
>>> learning iterations before they got it about right for popups.
>>
>> I think we at least are now asking the right question :-)
>
> Indeed. However when I see the different directions taken by this  
> thread,
> I wonder if the question would not be more to clearly define what is
> expected from web applications.

I see your point. But such a architectural view is a luxury to people  
building web applications today.

I would not refer to XHR usage as a hack. The effort underway to  
define its behavior and security restrictions is removing any  
hackiness from its origin and giving webapp developers a stable API  
to work on. That is great.

The purpose of this thread was to check with a HTTP architectural  
view a specific detail of XHRs security considerations, namely how to  
handle "unknown" methods in the context of "same server" requests.

I think Roy pretty much made the points from HTTP point of view and I  
have not seen anyone arguing against it. (Which for some strange  
reason, rarely happens to Roy...)
Received on Tuesday, 13 June 2006 08:07:17 GMT

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