- From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@yahoo-inc.com>
- Date: Wed, 3 May 2006 13:56:22 -0700
- To: <David.Carson@nokia.com> <David.Carson@nokia.com>
- Cc: <public-webapi@w3.org>
RFC2616, Section 7.2.1; > Any HTTP/1.1 message containing an entity-body SHOULD include a > Content-Type header field defining the media type of that body. If > and only if the media type is not given by a Content-Type field, > the > recipient MAY attempt to guess the media type via inspection of its > content and/or the name extension(s) of the URI used to identify > the > resource. If the media type remains unknown, the recipient SHOULD > treat it as type "application/octet-stream". On 2006/05/03, at 12:18 PM, <David.Carson@nokia.com> <David.Carson@nokia.com> wrote: > > Hi All, > We have recently run into a case where XMLHTTPRequest is being used to > POST content, but the javascript author has failed to add the > mandatory > content-type header. We were wondering what the default content type > should be. We believe that it should be the same default as the > default > content type for a FORM post. > Oddly enough, the w3 draft spec for xmlhttprequest does not even state > that you should provide a content-type when posting: > http://www.w3.org/TR/XMLHttpRequest/#dfn-send > whereas XULPlanet at least states one should be provided: > http://www.xulplanet.com/references/objref/ > XMLHttpRequest.html#method_se > nd > "The MIME type of the stream should be specified by setting the > Content- > Type header via the setRequestHeader method before calling send." > neither say what the default should be. > > Thanks > David Carson > Nokia S60 Browser > > > > -- Mark Nottingham mnot@yahoo-inc.com
Received on Wednesday, 3 May 2006 20:57:44 UTC