W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-appformats@w3.org > January 2008

Re: Proposal for a way to avoid a round-trip on every POST when dealing with large numbers of URIs

From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 01:03:51 +0000 (UTC)
To: Thomas Roessler <tlr@w3.org>
Cc: public-appformats@w3.org
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.62.0801310102100.3212@hixie.dreamhostps.com>

On Thu, 31 Jan 2008, Thomas Roessler wrote:
>
> On 2008-01-30 22:09:57 +0000, Ian Hickson wrote:
> 
> > When a 200 OK OPTIONS response has this header with a path that doesn't 
> > match its own URI (as defined above), any Access-Control headers, 
> > <?access-control?> PIs, and Method-Check-Max-Age headers are ignored.
> 
> I suspect that you intend "match" to mean both a prefix match and an 
> exact match?

I meant that when a 200 OK OPTIONS response has the header with a path 
which, after adding a leading slash if a leading slash is not present, is 
not an exact match for the path component of the URI of the 200 OK 
response itself, any Access-Control headers, <?access-control?> PIs, and 
Method-Check-Max-Age headers are ignored. This is really just reiterating 
what is already specified (through implication) by the rest of the 
proposal, which is why it doesn't use RFC2119 terminology.

-- 
Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Thursday, 31 January 2008 01:04:10 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 18:56:21 UTC