W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > July to September 2008

Re: XDomainRequest Integration with AC

From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2008 09:53:27 +0200
To: "Jonas Sicking" <jonas@sicking.cc>
Cc: "Julian Reschke" <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, "Sunava Dutta" <sunavad@windows.microsoft.com>, "Maciej Stachowiak" <mjs@apple.com>, "Sharath Udupa" <Sharath.Udupa@microsoft.com>, "Zhenbin Xu" <Zhenbin.Xu@microsoft.com>, "Gideon Cohn" <gidco@windows.microsoft.com>, "public-webapps@w3.org" <public-webapps@w3.org>, "IE8 Core AJAX SWAT Team" <ieajax@microsoft.com>
Message-ID: <op.ugzz7dcb64w2qv@annevk-t60.oslo.opera.com>

On Fri, 05 Sep 2008 09:43:29 +0200, Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc> wrote:
> The only thing that i _know_ of is that:
>
> http://foo.com
> and
> http://foo.com:80
>
> are the same origin but have different string representations.

Yes, authors would have to use the former. (The former is also what Origin  
will tell them as well.)


> I have also heard that some UAs are able to handle non-ascii characters  
> in header values by somehow specifying an encoding. I don't really know  
> how that works, but for those UAs the following to origins would be  
> equivalent:
>
> http://www.xn--jrnspikar-v2a.com
> and
> http://www.järnspikar.com

Using the latter is non-conforming for Origin and also non-conforming for  
Access-Control-Allow-Origin, which per its current definition either  
mathces Origin literally or is a wildcard. So currently RFC 2047  
extensions are simply not supported (and not needeD) by the specification.  
Given that interoperability on encoded-word is very poor I suggest we keep  
it that way.


-- 
Anne van Kesteren
<http://annevankesteren.nl/>
<http://www.opera.com/>
Received on Friday, 5 September 2008 07:54:08 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 18:49:27 GMT