Re: Proposal for ... POST when dealing with large numbers of URIs

On Sat, 9 Feb 2008, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
> 
> The current specification does not prepend a slash. It requires the URI 
> to match the abs_path production from RFC 2616. It does append a slash 
> for comparison purposes. I explained this in the other e-mail.

The spec is somewhat unclear about this. In particular:

 * I can't find where it says what to do if the Policy-Path isn't an 
   abs_path.
 * I can't find where it says what to do if the Policy-Path on the 
   original OPTIONS request is the same as the original request URI.
 * "If policy URI with an additional trailing slash, if not present," 
   doesn't really make sense to me. How can an _additional_ trailing slash 
   ever be present? You can always add more slashes... I recommend simply 
   being more explicit and tedious in the explanation.

Later it says "The Access-Control-Origin header is set, obviously". I 
don't think there's anything obvious about it. :-)

-- 
Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'

Received on Saturday, 9 February 2008 23:02:01 UTC