- From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
- Date: Mon, 26 May 2008 00:19:25 +0200
- To: "Julian Reschke" <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Cc: "Laurens Holst" <lholst@students.cs.uu.nl>, public-webapi@w3.org
On Sun, 25 May 2008 18:04:14 +0200, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> wrote: > Apparently existing content does not rely on it (FF gets away with > implementing something that IMHO makes *much* more sense). So why > standardize it at all, or, when doing so, select something that doesn't > make sense in practice? > > Or are you claiming that people who set a header to null *really* want > the specified behaviour? It's consistent with other JavaScript APIs were null also means "null". Overloading this API to also do removal of the header is not a goal here and is simply a bug in Firefox as it also does that for the empty string value (Firefox simply treats null identically to the empty string, where other browsers treat it identically to "null". -- Anne van Kesteren <http://annevankesteren.nl/> <http://www.opera.com/>
Received on Sunday, 25 May 2008 22:19:38 UTC