Anne van Kesteren wrote: > > On Tue, 13 May 2008 10:40:16 +0200, Julian Reschke > <julian.reschke@gmx.de> wrote: >> Anne van Kesteren wrote: >>> I see. (Your original message seemed to imply the list was not >>> correct.) To be honest, and as I've stated in my reply to Julian, I'm >>> not sure what the rationale is for some of them. Hopefully >>> implementors can chime in on this thread and provide feedback for why >>> each of the headers listed in setRequestHeader() is blocked. >> >> Right. On the other hand, if nobody can explain why a particular >> header is on that list, it should be removed. > > All the headers on that list are better controlled by the user agent. I > made the specification more clear on that. > > I also made it clear that the user agent is not to set any headers other > than those on that list and those permitted to be set if the author has > not set them (as explained under the send() algorithm). So, why are the headers below on the list? * Accept-Charset * Accept-Encoding * Expect * Referer * User-Agent BR, JulianReceived on Tuesday, 27 May 2008 12:32:43 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 May 2008 12:32:44 GMT