W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > April to June 2010

Re: CORS Last Call status/plans? [Was: Re: [UMP] Request for Last Call]

From: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 2010 12:13:26 -0700
Message-ID: <u2m63df84f1004191213k544e228bsde0ccabe4788818@mail.gmail.com>
To: Tyler Close <tyler.close@gmail.com>
Cc: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, Ben Laurie <benl@google.com>, Arthur Barstow <Art.Barstow@nokia.com>, ext Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>, public-webapps <public-webapps@w3.org>
On Mon, Apr 19, 2010 at 11:47 AM, Tyler Close <tyler.close@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 19, 2010 at 11:39 AM, Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc> wrote:
>> On Mon, Apr 19, 2010 at 11:30 AM, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Apr 19, 2010, at 10:06 AM, Tyler Close wrote:
>>>
>>>>     Uniform-Headers = "Uniform-Headers" ":" ( "*" | #field-name )
>>>
>>> [...]
>>>
>>>> Are Apple and/or Firefox interested in implementing the above? Does
>>>> mnot or other HTTP WG members consider the above a satisfactory
>>>> solution to ISSUE-90?
>>>
>>> I'm interested in implementing a feature along these lines if it goes into
>>> CORS. If it's UMP-only, then no, and I would object that it violates the
>>> subset relation.
>>>
>>> I am also not sure the * value is a good idea. It is tempting in its
>>> convenience but seems likely to cause unintended consequences.
>>
>> I agree with everything Maciej said.
>>
>> This time.
>
> Thanks for the quick response time.
>
> If this is a good feature, shouldn't the pressure be on CORS to adopt
> it, rather than for UMP to drop it? Otherwise, it might seem politics
> are overriding technical virtue.

I didn't mean to exert any pressure on UMP to drop it. Sorry if you
read otherwise into what I said.

/ Jonas
Received on Monday, 19 April 2010 19:14:19 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 18:49:38 GMT