Re: Recent spec change to XMLHttpRequest default Content-Type

Julian Reschke schrieb:
> You're violating a SHOULD level requirement of HTTP/1.1 then. Sorry, but
> that's what you get for that :-).
> 
>> - I definately dont want to see future browsers choke on that
> 
> Actually, I'm tempted to say it would be good for the web if more UAs
> would flag missing content-type headers.
> 

I tend to disagree.
SHOULD means "there may exist valid reasons in particular circumstances to
ignore a particular item".

The (IMHO) valid reason here is:
- redundant header overhead
- the UA isn't even meant to interpret the response, so it doesn't need
  any information on how to parse it


-- 
Mit freundlichen Grüssen,

Carsten Orthbandt


pixeltamer.net
c/o Carsten Orthbandt
Baumschulenstrasse 102
12437 Berlin
+49 (0) 30 34347690