- From: Sylvain Hellegouarch <sh@defuze.org>
- Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2006 09:13:35 +0100 (BST)
- To: "HTTP Working Group" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
> I see your point. But such a architectural view is a luxury to people > building web applications today. I can totally acknowledge that deciding to update HTTP is not something that will pay off anytime soon. However I do hope at some point this will happen. > > I would not refer to XHR usage as a hack. The effort underway to > define its behavior and security restrictions is removing any > hackiness from its origin and giving webapp developers a stable API > to work on. That is great. Fair enough. Let's agree that XHR is not a hack. What some people try to achieve with it goes beyond its purpose (incidently showing that there is a real potential for an update of the Web architecture) and this often becomes ugly. > > The purpose of this thread was to check with a HTTP architectural > view a specific detail of XHRs security considerations, namely how to > handle "unknown" methods in the context of "same server" requests. Point taken. > I think Roy pretty much made the points from HTTP point of view and I > have not seen anyone arguing against it. (Which for some strange > reason, rarely happens to Roy...) :) Thanks for the feedback, - Sylvain
Received on Tuesday, 13 June 2006 08:13:48 UTC