W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapi@w3.org > May 2007

Re: The XMLHttpRequest Object comments

From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
Date: Mon, 07 May 2007 18:44:45 +0200
To: "Innovimax SARL" <innovimax@gmail.com>, public-webapi@w3.org
Message-ID: <op.tryt4veg64w2qv@id-c0020.oslo.opera.com>

Your attention to detail is much appreciated!

On Mon, 07 May 2007 17:05:59 +0200, Innovimax SARL <innovimax@gmail.com>  
wrote:
> Implementations should support some version of XML. If they don't
> support some version of XML responseXML must always be null. [XML]
> [XMLNS]
> ]]
>
> Does it mean a conformant implementation could support NO version of XML?

Yes, in theory.


> The version implied by the text is the version of XML. So "1.0" and
> "1.1". There must be a reference to XML 1.1 specification in that
> respect

Argh, really? Having two references for XML seems already too much to me  
:-) I think the current text and references are good. Apart from Opera I'm  
not sure any user agent actually supports XML 1.1 so normatively  
referencing it doesn't like a good idea to me. The language used in the  
specification is backed up by the references which say XML 1.0 and  
Namespaces for XML 1.0.


> What is not clear is about support XML 1.0 or XML 1.0 with Namespaces
> : what is the expected behavior if the filename send is
> [[
> <?xml version="1.0"?>
> <::/>
> ]]
> which is a valid XML 1.0 file but not a valid XML 1.0 with Namespaces ?
>
> Please clarify the behaviour regarding this

This is clear in the specification. It requires files to be namespace  
well-formed.


> == 1.2.2. Terminology ==
> [[
> There is a case-insensitive match of strings a and b if after
> lowercasing both strings (by mapping A-Z to a-z) they are identical.
> ]]
>
> I would prefer to read
>
> [[
> There is a case-insensitive match of strings s1 and s2 if after
> upercasing both strings (by mapping a-z to A-Z) they are identical.
> ]]
> s1 and s2 because there is less confusion with letter a and b
> uppercasing because it is used latter in the spec for method

Fair enough, done.


> ==References==
> [[
> [RFC2617]
>     HTTP Authentication: Basic and Digest Access Authentication, ...
> ]]
> should be
> [[
> [RFC2617]
>     HTTP Authentication: Basic and Digest Access Authentication, P.
> Hallam-Baker, J. Hostetler, S. Lawrence, P. Leach, A. Luotonen, L.
> Stewart, editors. IETF,
> June 1999
> ]]

Indeed! Fixed.


> Warning for next step : Reference to "Window Object" and "Document
> Object Model (DOM) Level 3 Events Specification" are Working Draft

Well, I think we can go to Candidate Recommendation and sit there until  
everything reaches that level, much like SVG Tiny 1.2 did.


> ==Typo==
> s/reqeust/request/
> s/resonse/response/

Fixed!


-- 
Anne van Kesteren
<http://annevankesteren.nl/>
<http://www.opera.com/>
Received on Monday, 7 May 2007 16:44:59 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:18:57 GMT