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

Re: The XMLHttpRequest Object comments

From: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 9 May 2007 18:49:11 +0200
Message-ID: <1459353541.20070509184911@w3.org>
To: "Anne van Kesteren" <annevk@opera.com>
Cc: "Maciej Stachowiak" <mjs@apple.com>, "Innovimax SARL" <innovimax@gmail.com>, "Jon Ferraiolo" <jferrai@us.ibm.com>, "Web API WG (public)" <public-webapi@w3.org>

On Tuesday, May 8, 2007, 12:10:55 PM, Anne wrote:

AvK> On Tue, 08 May 2007 01:16:57 +0200, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
AvK> wrote:
>> On May 7, 2007, at 3:11 PM, Innovimax SARL wrote:
>>> I agree that it seems strange to have an "XML"HttpRequest that does not  
>>> support XML at all !!

>> I don't necessarily agree with that, I can see that non-XML UAs may  
>> still want to support it only for transmitting text. But I think there  
>> should be a conformance class that does include the XML support, even if  
>> the baseline conforming implementation doesn't.

AvK> That makes sense. I added a "conforming XML user agent" class. I hope this
AvK> satisfies the people who replied in this thread (all in To:).

That works for me. 

Higher-level specs that normatively refer to XHR can always mandate that optional conformance class.

AvK> (I'm treating the comment from Stewart Brodie as a separate comment.)

 Chris Lilley                    mailto:chris@w3.org
 Interaction Domain Leader
 Co-Chair, W3C SVG Working Group
 W3C Graphics Activity Lead
 Co-Chair, W3C Hypertext CG
Received on Wednesday, 9 May 2007 16:49:51 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:16:23 UTC