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: Tue, 13 Jun 2006 09:13:35 +0100 (BST)
Message-ID: <63023.194.221.74.7.1150186415.squirrel@mail1.webfaction.com>
To: "HTTP Working Group" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>


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

I can totally acknowledge that deciding to update HTTP is not something
that will pay off anytime soon. However I do hope at some point this will
happen.

>
> 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.

Fair enough.
Let's agree that XHR is not a hack. What some people try to achieve with
it goes beyond its purpose (incidently showing that there is a real
potential for an update of the Web architecture) and this often becomes
ugly.

>
> 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.

Point taken.

> 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...)

:)

Thanks for the feedback,
- Sylvain
Received on Tuesday, 13 June 2006 08:13:48 GMT

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