- From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>
- Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2014 11:30:12 +0000
- To: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
- Cc: Arvind Jain <arvind@google.com>, Jatinder Mann <jmann@microsoft.com>, "public-web-perf@w3.org" <public-web-perf@w3.org>
On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 8:28 AM, Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc> wrote: > On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 8:43 PM, Arvind Jain <arvind@google.com> wrote: >> from Jonas: >> "We should define though that any CORS errors during the response >> should be ignored. If we do that, effectively the only effect of using >> CORS is that cross-origin beacons that use a content-type other than >> the ones above will require a preflight." >> >> Should I add this to the spec? Could you suggest exact language? > > I'll have to defer to Anne for how to do that. In general it seems a beacon does not give any indication whether it succeeded or failed. Therefore that a fetch with a request whose mode is CORS returns a network error seems unobservable and irrelevant. What am I missing? >> Also is this thread fully resolved? >> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-web-perf/2014Jan/0003.html > > I think there's been general agreement yes. But I'll respond over there. If you define everything in terms of http://fetch.spec.whatwg.org/ there is no way this could be ambiguous. -- http://annevankesteren.nl/
Received on Wednesday, 12 February 2014 11:30:44 UTC