- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Tue, 13 May 2008 10:40:16 +0200
- To: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
- CC: Sunava Dutta <sunavad@windows.microsoft.com>, "public-webapi@w3.org" <public-webapi@w3.org>, Gideon Cohn <gidco@windows.microsoft.com>, Ahmed Kamel <Ahmed.Kamel@microsoft.com>, Zhenbin Xu <zhenbinx@windows.microsoft.com>, Doug Stamper <dstamper@exchange.microsoft.com>
Anne van Kesteren wrote: > I see. (Your original message seemed to imply the list was not correct.) > To be honest, and as I've stated in my reply to Julian, I'm not sure > what the rationale is for some of them. Hopefully implementors can chime > in on this thread and provide feedback for why each of the headers > listed in setRequestHeader() is blocked. Right. On the other hand, if nobody can explain why a particular header is on that list, it should be removed. > I'm not sure if that information should be included in the specification > itself though. Generally that's not done in specifications as far as I > can tell. I'd say it's done in well-written specs. BR, Julian
Received on Tuesday, 13 May 2008 08:40:58 UTC