- From: Arvind Jain <arvind@google.com>
- Date: Fri, 9 May 2014 06:35:05 -0700
- To: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>
- Cc: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>, Jatinder Mann <jmann@microsoft.com>, "public-web-perf@w3.org" <public-web-perf@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAOYaDdPvauVkYKiLDuTN-89KMM3a3xdR0ed=wTTh-Q9M_Xv7Ow@mail.gmail.com>
Hi Anne, Just checking if the changes I made are in the right direction. Please let me know. Thanks, Arvind On Sun, Apr 27, 2014 at 8:09 AM, Arvind Jain <arvind@google.com> wrote: > Hi Anne, > I've addressed your comments #1, #2e and #2h in this revision: > https://w3c.github.io/web-performance/specs/Beacon/Overview.html > > Please let me know if you have further comments. I referenced the fetch > definition from whatwg standard. > > Arvind > > > > On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 2:30 AM, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>wrote: > >> On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 8:29 AM, Arvind Jain <arvind@google.com> wrote: >> > Fetch url from the base origin using the POST HTTP method with >> > transmittedData, encoding, and mime type. >> >> Depends on which fetch algorithm you reference. If you reference >> http://fetch.spec.whatwg.org/ it could, but you'd need to supply a >> request as parameter and fill in its details. >> >> >> > 2) Re: this comment of yours: >> >>> 1. I don't understand the part of section 4.2 that is not IDL. It >> >>> seems to contradict the processing model on multiple occasions. Part >> >>> of it does not, I think, but that should be separated and the >> >>> authorization bit should be a parameter to Fetch. >> > >> > The duplicate bits with the text in processing model are: >> > a) The sendBeacon method MUST asynchronously transmit data provided by >> the >> > data parameter to the resolved URL provided by the url parameter. >> > b) The User Agent MUST use the POST HTTP method to fetch the url for >> > transmitting the data. >> > c) All relevant cookie headers MUST be included in the request. User >> agents >> > MUST honor the HTTP headers (including, in particular, redirects and >> HTTP >> > cookie headers). >> > >> > (a) is a basic definition of the method. So can we keep it here? >> >> Not if you use 2119 terms. >> >> >> > Would that address your concern? >> >> I would have to see the new text. >> >> >> > Besides these, I still need to address your comments 2c, 2f and 2g. I'm >> > working on them. >> >> Ok. >> >> >> -- >> http://annevankesteren.nl/ >> > >
Received on Friday, 9 May 2014 13:35:33 UTC