Re: XHR LC comment: Accept header went from MUST NOT to SHOULD

Anne van Kesteren schreef:
> On Thu, 15 May 2008 20:56:42 +0200, Laurens Holst 
> <lholst@students.cs.uu.nl> wrote:
>> Why was this changed? Why should user agents pretend that they know what
>> kind of resource the user expects by setting an Accept header that is
>> unreliable? FWIW, Internet Explorer and Safari set the (reasonably
>> acceptable */*), but it would be better to leave it out entirely. 
>> Also see:
>>
>> http://www.grauw.nl/blog/entry/470
>
> It was pointed out by another Last Call comment that not setting the 
> Accept header causes servers to break. Given the results above I 
> suppose we could require that for XMLHttpRequest purposes it is at 
> least always set to */*. Would that work?

It would not be my preferred resolution, I like the old text better (and 
if possible would like to see an example of a website that breaks). But 
it would be acceptable.

I assume this is the thread you are talking about:

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapi/2008Apr/0133.html
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapi/2008May/0137.html

Thanks for your response.

~Grauw

-- 
Ushiko-san! Kimi wa doushite, Ushiko-san nan da!!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Laurens Holst, student, university of Utrecht, the Netherlands.
Website: www.grauw.nl. Backbase employee; www.backbase.com.