W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapi@w3.org > May 2008

Re: XHR header blacklist rationale

From: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
Date: Tue, 27 May 2008 18:05:58 +0200
To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Cc: "public-webapi@w3.org" <public-webapi@w3.org>
Message-ID: <i1co34t107lkl7ca74fkrbep9ppnig4ltu@hive.bjoern.hoehrmann.de>

* Julian Reschke wrote:
>I also don't see why the client shouldn't have the option to set the 
>Expect header; keep in mind that although 100-continue is the only 
>expectation code defined in RFC2616, other codes can be defined as well, 
>and it's not XHR's business to close that door.

I think whether the client uses `Expect: 100-continue` is a decision
similar to deciding whether the client uses, say, a Transfer-Encoding.
The client may also be specifically configured to use a different
version of the protocol, like IE is configured to talk HTTP/1.0 to
proxy servers by default. Besides, the client may not even handle the
100-continue response properly.
-- 
Björn Höhrmann · mailto:bjoern@hoehrmann.de · http://bjoern.hoehrmann.de
Weinh. Str. 22 · Telefon: +49(0)621/4309674 · http://www.bjoernsworld.de
68309 Mannheim · PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78 · http://www.websitedev.de/ 
Received on Tuesday, 27 May 2008 16:13:27 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 May 2008 16:13:27 GMT