Re: Recent spec change to XMLHttpRequest default Content-Type

Carsten Orthbandt wrote:
> ...
> The currently published version at http://www.w3.org/TR/XMLHttpRequest/
> says in section 2.1 responseXML that
> ...

"Published" in the sense of "work in progress". Don't rely on these things.

> ...
> So what do I want?
> 
> - I'd like to avoid the implied header overhead of Content-Type for protocols
> that don't use XML.

You're violating a SHOULD level requirement of HTTP/1.1 then. Sorry, but 
that's what you get for that :-).

> - I definately dont want to see future browsers choke on that

Actually, I'm tempted to say it would be good for the web if more UAs 
would flag missing content-type headers.

> ...

Best regards, Julian

Received on Friday, 15 June 2007 07:48:47 UTC