W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapi@w3.org > April 2006

Re: XMLHttpRequest Object feedback

From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@yahoo-inc.com>
Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2006 11:00:17 -0700
Message-Id: <03F86423-2AC2-429F-9DBE-5A22795A981A@yahoo-inc.com>
To: public-webapi@w3.org

> > This works because site B has no control over the Referer that  
> site A
> > sends. It does not work perfectly (you have to account for  
> browsers  that
> > don't send referer), but it works well enough, because third   
> parties
> > can't control how your browser sends Referer headers. If you  give
> > programmatic control of the Referer to site B, you allow them to   
> bypass
> > such mechanisms.
>
> Except of course you only allow them if there's some hypothetical  
> cross
> domain XHR, something which doesn't exist,

AIUI that's under discussion in a TF now.

> and then usefully there's a way
> of taking an XHR stream and converting it to an image or video  
> stream, again
> something that doesn't exist.

You're losing me here; how do "image or video streams" come into it?

> > Most browsers today (the only exception I've seen yet is  
> Mozilla)  send
> > Referer from XMLHttpRequest; by explicitly disallowing it from   
> being
> > automatically set, you're diverging from the current model for   
> XHR, as
> > well as diverging from the model for normal browser operation.
>
> I don't want to specifically disallow it, I don't want it to be  
> MUST, nor do
> I see a particular reason for it not to be overridable - a browser  
> may want
> to not allow it to be overridable  without specific user agreement  
> outside
> of the same domain for such reasons, but I don't see the reason for
> disallowing it from overriding within the same domain - given that  
> any cross
> domain is with the explicit agreement of the user in all  
> implementations
> today, I don't see the problem with any of them setting it, indeed  
> I have
> many use cases for it.

OK. I've made my case and have heard from some individuals; it seems  
like there's agreement that automatically setting Referer shouldn't  
be disallowed, but disagreement about whether it should be  
overridable. I'd like to hear the WG's opinion on the matter.

> The most prominent being the same Accessibility Testing assistant  
> mentioned
> elsewhere.

ref?

Cheers,

--
Mark Nottingham
mnot@yahoo-inc.com
Received on Friday, 7 April 2006 18:01:06 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:18:54 GMT