- From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@yahoo-inc.com>
- Date: Fri, 12 May 2006 12:09:17 -0700
- To: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
- Cc: "Web APIs WG (public)" <public-webapi@w3.org>
Let me come back with a concrete use case in a week or two. I'm not asking for versioning, just insight into what the browser is doing for the author vs. leaving for the author to do. Cheers, On 2006/05/12, at 4:32 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote: > > On Wed, 10 May 2006 17:30:50 +0200, Mark Nottingham <mnot@yahoo- > inc.com> wrote: >> I'm wondering if it would be useful to have some optional flags in >> implementations that developers can use to test for. While many JS >> features can be tested for by testing a property, this isn't so >> for XHR; e.g., you can't easily test to see if it supports more >> than GET and POST, for example, or if the cache is correctly >> implemented. >> >> [...] > > hasFeature() didn't work out, this won't work out either. Basically > most versioning proposals don't work out :-) > > > -- > Anne van Kesteren > <http://annevankesteren.nl/> > <http://www.opera.com/> > > > -- Mark Nottingham mnot@yahoo-inc.com
Received on Friday, 12 May 2006 19:10:06 UTC