W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > October to December 2008

Re: [XHR] (Late) LC Comments

From: Geoffrey Sneddon <foolistbar@googlemail.com>
Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2008 16:11:44 +0200
Cc: public-webapps@w3.org
Message-Id: <53C2B605-065F-4697-894C-681D7B642FB7@googlemail.com>
To: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>

On 12 Jun 2008, at 14:33, Anne van Kesteren wrote:

>> status and statusText currently MUST throw INVALID_STATE_ERR when  
>> there isn't any status code or text respectively sent by the  
>> server. HTTP/0.9 includes neither: Saf, Fx, and IE all return 200  
>> and "OK", and Op returns 0 and "". There isn't actually any issue  
>> with the state, so throwing an INVALID_STATE_ERR makes little  
>> sense. Also, a fair number of servers manage to omit the  
>> statusText, and that should just return "OK" (per Saf, Fx, and IE).  
>> I'd say that it should only throw if the state is UNSENT or OPENED.
> I think it would be better if HTTP defined what clients should  
> assume (200 and OK most likely) in case the response data does not  
> include it. Your HTTP parsing specification could do this for  
> instance.

I think that we should have this in XHR. Basic summary is that Firefox  
and Safari default to 200/OK; Opera defaults to 0/"" (but does not  
throw INVALID_STATE_ERR); IE is inconsistent and sometimes gives 200/ 
OK or -1/some-random-value-from-the-HTTP-response. I think we should  
probably just spec in XHR that 200/OK should be returned when there is  
no status-code/reason-phrase.

We're fairly close to interoperability (as IE already sometimes does  
it), and nothing matches the spec currently at all, I think it should  
be put in XHR and not wait until my HTTP parsing spec, and waiting to  
see if anyone will actually implement that.

Geoffrey Sneddon
Received on Monday, 20 October 2008 14:12:27 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 11 February 2015 14:36:31 UTC