- From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
- Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2010 17:03:39 +0200
- To: "Maciej Stachowiak" <mjs@apple.com>, "Julian Reschke" <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Cc: "Yves Lafon" <ylafon@w3.org>, "Adam Barth" <ietf@adambarth.com>, httpbis <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On Fri, 20 Aug 2010 11:18:57 +0200, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> wrote: > FYI: I re-ran the test and sent an HTTP trace offlist. > > Anne: regarding XHR -- a silent rewrite of the method is invisible to > the caller and thus a bug. On the other hand, silently following the > redirect for an unsafe method is still a problem, no matter how we > phrase it in httpbis. The safest approach for XHR would be to allow > implementations not to follow the redirect, and let the caller handle it > instead. http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2616#section-9.1.1 does not really make a requirement on UI of user agents. Why is it so much stronger for redirects? It makes no sense. Especially if we at some point give script authors control over handling redirects so they can implement following redirects themselves. -- Anne van Kesteren http://annevankesteren.nl/
Received on Tuesday, 24 August 2010 15:04:20 UTC