- From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
- Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2010 22:16:28 +0200
- To: "Darin Fisher" <darin@chromium.org>
- Cc: "WebApps WG" <public-webapps@w3.org>, Joćo Eiras <joao.eiras@gmail.com>
On Tue, 31 Aug 2010 19:04:08 +0200, Darin Fisher <darin@chromium.org> wrote: > So the idea is that you would have to manually create the redirect > request using a new XHR if you wanted to manually follow the redirect? Yeah, or you could reset the existing object using open(). > One risk with that is that it is easy to construct the redirect request > improperly. There's the classic example of what happens when you issue a > POST request and it results in a redirect. 303 and 307 had to be > invented because some browsers implemented 302 incorrectly. Yeah, though I think that the people that implement redirects manually have put some thought in the matter. Maybe that is naive, though on the other hand if people do it wrong it does not matter much either. > Maybe there should be a way to create a new XHR from the existing XHR > that is already configured to follow the redirect? I'm not sure how to > make this less awkward... If this is actually common and people start using this a lot and ask this question here that would be the point where we should start thinking about making this less awkward. For now libraries and developers with "lots of time" have all the hooks they need. -- Anne van Kesteren http://annevankesteren.nl/
Received on Tuesday, 31 August 2010 20:17:08 UTC