- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Wed, 01 Sep 2010 14:19:43 +0200
- To: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
- CC: Darin Fisher <darin@chromium.org>, WebApps WG <public-webapps@w3.org>
On 01.09.2010 10:16, Anne van Kesteren wrote: > ... >> I thought of another reason to want the original XHR object to be >> responsible for following the redirect: the value of a Location header >> may be a relative URL. It would be nice if application authors did not >> have to take care of resolving that manually. (In the case of a >> cross-origin >> request, the relative URL should be resolved relative to the URL that was >> redirected instead of against the Document.) This seems like something >> that could be easy to mess up. > > Yeah, I thought of that. There's location.resolveURL(), but it does not > take a base URL at the moment. We could add that. Though note that > relative URLs are forbidden in theory. > ... They are in RFC 2616, but not in HTTPbis (<http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/draft-ietf-httpbis-p2-semantics-11.html#rfc.section.9.4>). Best regards, Julian
Received on Wednesday, 1 September 2010 12:20:24 UTC