- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Mon, 26 May 2008 13:13:29 +0200
- To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- CC: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>, Laurens Holst <lholst@students.cs.uu.nl>, public-webapi@w3.org
Ian Hickson wrote:
> On Mon, 26 May 2008, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
>> On Mon, 26 May 2008 10:00:26 +0200, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com> wrote:
>>> I am ok with deferring such a mechanism to XHR2 however. In WebKit we'll
>>> likely implement it equally quickly whether it is in XHR1 or XHR2 since it
>>> seems like useful functionality. But there are complications, namely, how
>>> does it interact with headers that are set automatically by the UA?
>> It's not clear to me at all what problem it solves. The examples given
>> so far are all UA bugs.
>
> I do think that setting the header to the empty string (as if "" had been
> passed instead) is better behaviour, from an author's point of view. If
> that would resolve this issue then that seems like a good choice.
That is not sufficient for the case where a library wants to set a
header that may already have been set before.
If it does
xhr.setRequestHeader("foo", "");
xhr.setRequestHeader("foo", "bar");
currently would result in
foo: ,bar
being sent.
BR, Julian
PS: and no, FF3 doesn't do that.
Received on Monday, 26 May 2008 11:14:33 UTC