W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > July to September 2009

Re: HTTP status code equivalents for file:// operations - compat with xhr

From: Michael A. Puls II <shadow2531@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2009 13:53:02 -0400
To: "Anne van Kesteren" <annevk@opera.com>, public-webapps@w3.org
Message-ID: <op.uyvdaoyx1ejg13@sandra-svwliu01>
On Tue, 18 Aug 2009 05:50:13 -0400, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>  
wrote:

> On Tue, 18 Aug 2009 09:19:03 +0200, Michael A. Puls II  
> <shadow2531@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I'm not saying file: support should be added to the XHR spec, but there
>> should be some 'file:// for XHR' guidelines that browsers could use.
>
> Nowhere in the documentation of the Web platform there is documentation  
> for things to do with file URLs. In fact, file URLs are woefully  
> underdefined.

It doesn't have to stay that way though.

> I do not think adding text to the XMLHttpRequest specification is a good  
> use of our time until we actually decide that interoperability on the  
> file URL level matters

I personally think it matters. But, would like to know if anyone else  
cares.

> and we have someone to drive that effort.

Well, cross-origin issues in browsers should be pretty  
protocol-independent. That should mostly leave file: URI format (described  
better than RFC 1738), access limits (what directories from the base are  
allowed), and HTTP status code equivalents (for use with things like XHR).

Are vendors interested in having all of that as an RFC or W3C spec for  
example?

Thanks

-- 
Michael
Received on Tuesday, 18 August 2009 17:53:45 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 18:49:33 GMT