W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-web-perf@w3.org > February 2014

Re: [agenda] Web Performance WG Teleconference #125 Agenda 2014-02-12

From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>
Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2014 11:30:12 +0000
Message-ID: <CADnb78hX-j3WDrqboNf1_j2n2oRYXRk9RJq8qyQfE2=xa_29bg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
Cc: Arvind Jain <arvind@google.com>, Jatinder Mann <jmann@microsoft.com>, "public-web-perf@w3.org" <public-web-perf@w3.org>
On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 8:28 AM, Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc> wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 8:43 PM, Arvind Jain <arvind@google.com> wrote:
>> from Jonas:
>> "We should define though that any CORS errors during the response
>> should be ignored. If we do that, effectively the only effect of using
>> CORS is that cross-origin beacons that use a content-type other than
>> the ones above will require a preflight."
>>
>> Should I add this to the spec? Could you suggest exact language?
>
> I'll have to defer to Anne for how to do that.

In general it seems a beacon does not give any indication whether it
succeeded or failed. Therefore that a fetch with a request whose mode
is CORS returns a network error seems unobservable and irrelevant.
What am I missing?


>> Also is this thread fully resolved?
>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-web-perf/2014Jan/0003.html
>
> I think there's been general agreement yes. But I'll respond over there.

If you define everything in terms of http://fetch.spec.whatwg.org/
there is no way this could be ambiguous.


-- 
http://annevankesteren.nl/
Received on Wednesday, 12 February 2014 11:30:44 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:04:38 UTC