- From: Tobie Langel <tobie@fb.com>
- Date: Thu, 6 Sep 2012 14:04:07 +0000
- To: Robin Berjon <robin@w3.org>, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- CC: "public-webapps@w3.org" <public-webapps@w3.org>
On 9/5/12 12:33 PM, "Robin Berjon" <robin@w3.org> wrote: >On 05/09/2012 06:03 , Mark Nottingham wrote: >> That's unfortunate, because part of the intent of the UA header is to >>identify the software making the request, for debugging / tracing >>purposes. >> >> Given that lots of libraries generate XHR requests, it would be natural >>for them to identify themselves in UA, by appending a token to the >>browser's UA (the header is a list of product tokens). As it is, they >>have to use a separate header. > >Do you have a use case that does not involve the vanity of the library's >authors? :) I would think Caja[1] would legitimately want to change the User Agent String of ajax requests that got through it. The capabilities the Caja runtime provides to cajoled code are so different than those of its host environment that it makes complete sense for the User Agent string to be different. It's really a browser within a browser. --tobie --- [1]: http://code.google.com/p/google-caja/
Received on Thursday, 6 September 2012 14:04:34 UTC