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

Re: XMLHttpRequest request bodies

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Mon, 15 May 2006 08:52:43 +0200
Message-ID: <4468253B.9070004@gmx.de>
To: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
CC: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>, "Web APIs WG (public)" <public-webapi@w3.org>

Anne van Kesteren wrote:
> On Mon, 24 Apr 2006 21:15:36 +0200, Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org> wrote:
>> On 4/22/06, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com> wrote:
>>> Current implementations silently ignore the body in this case.
>> FWIW, I decided to test this.  As it turns out, IE and Firefox on
>> WinXP pass bodies on all methods except GET (actually, I couldn't test
>> GET on IE - it would only send POST!), and Opera passes them only with
>> POST (and doesn't support PUT?!).  That's all the browsers I have
>> access to right now.
>> http://www.markbaker.ca/2006/XHRTests/
> So I have no strong opinions about this, but my suggestion would be to 
> say that the data passed to send() is always used as the entity body, if 
> present, unless the method argument is GET in which case it's dropped. 
> Any objections?

I don't think there actually was consensus that RFC2616 forbids request 
bodies upon GET.

Anyway, I think XHR would be a better specification if it avoids 
profiling HTTP. What harm is done if the spec just stays silent about 
that topic?

Best regards, Julian
Received on Monday, 15 May 2006 06:55:15 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:16:21 UTC