W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > April to June 2012

Re: [XHR] XMLHttpRequest.send("")

From: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2012 18:00:35 -0700
Message-ID: <CA+c2ei_65hydoD-xTKX5g9X4YWYzM3BThDBCyo1y0mvUbqKPQQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Cc: Glenn Maynard <glenn@zewt.org>, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>, public-webapps@w3.org
On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 4:15 PM, Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc> wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 4:11 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 3:58 PM, Glenn Maynard <glenn@zewt.org> wrote:
>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 5:50 PM, Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc> wrote:
>>>> Is it more surprising than that
>>>>
>>>> xhr.send(hasSomethingToSend() ? getTheThingToSend() : "");
>>>>
>>>> sets the Content-Type header even when no body is submitted?
>>>
>>> That's exactly what I would expect.  A body that happens to have a zero
>>> length is still valid text/plain data.
>
> I'm not sure everyone is sharing that expectation.
>
>>> If you want to omit Content-Type in the above case, then you should write:
>>>
>>> xhr.send(hasSomethingToSend() ? getTheThingToSend() : null);
>>
>> Or, of course:
>>
>> if(hasSomethingToSend())
>>  xhr.send(getTheThingToSend());
>
> That isn't terribly useful if you're trying to get a response...
>
> If I'm the only one who prefer the other behavior then we should stick
> to what the spec already says. I'll make sure Gecko maintains that
> behavior as we implement our new WebIDL bindings.

I got the following feedback from the WebIDL implementers:

One note, though.  If we do want the current behavior, then I think
that it would make sense to change the IDL for send() to:

 void send(ArrayBuffer data);
 void send(Blob data);
 void send(Document data);
 void send(optional DOMString? data = null);
 void send(FormData data);

and change the text that currently says "If the data argument has been
omitted or is null" to "If the data argument is null". That will make
it much clearer to someone reading the IDL that passing nothing has
the same behavior as passing null.

/ Jonas
Received on Wednesday, 11 April 2012 01:01:34 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 18:49:51 GMT