W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapi@w3.org > February 2008

Re: Extra Connection Support Proposal

From: Stewart Brodie <stewart.brodie@antplc.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2008 23:20:33 +0000
To: "Anne van Kesteren" <annevk@opera.com>
Cc: "Kris Zyp" <kzyp@sitepen.com>, "Web API WG (public)" <public-webapi@w3.org>
Message-ID: <16c00653972d437eb1c3fdafb9f03f4451e1dd2c@localhost>

"Anne van Kesteren" <annevk@opera.com> wrote:

> On Tue, 19 Feb 2008 20:47:50 +0100, Kris Zyp <kzyp@sitepen.com> wrote:
> > - it needs to be hints from the application, not control.
> > I don't mind if the wording is such that all the API level properties  
> > are treated as hints/suggestions for the underlying HTTP subsystems,  
> > that is fine. Letting the core systems have the final say seems  
> > appropriate. But without these hints a number of important capabilites  
> > of emerging web technologies are being severely hampered. XHR already  
> > has a lot of relatively low level capabilities including access to and  
> > modification of headers (which can be overriden by the underlying  
> > subsystems). At least hinting at expectations of long-lived responses  
> > and optimum pipeline orderings does not seem out of line with what XHR  
> > is.
> Headers are not a transport detail. Together with the entity body and the 

> HTTP method they form the request.

Yes and no.  Some headers are purely transport detail (e.g. Connection,
Transfer-Encoding, TE).  The problem is that these are mixed in with the
majority of others which aren't.

Stewart Brodie
Received on Tuesday, 19 February 2008 23:19:23 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 18:09:59 UTC