- From: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
- Date: Sun, 25 May 2008 16:30:48 -0700
- To: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
- Cc: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, Laurens Holst <lholst@students.cs.uu.nl>, public-webapi@w3.org
On May 25, 2008, at 3:19 PM, Anne van Kesteren wrote: > > On Sun, 25 May 2008 18:04:14 +0200, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de > > wrote: >> Apparently existing content does not rely on it (FF gets away with >> implementing something that IMHO makes *much* more sense). So why >> standardize it at all, or, when doing so, select something that >> doesn't make sense in practice? >> >> Or are you claiming that people who set a header to null *really* >> want the specified behaviour? > > It's consistent with other JavaScript APIs were null also means > "null". > > Overloading this API to also do removal of the header is not a goal > here and is simply a bug in Firefox as it also does that for the > empty string value (Firefox simply treats null identically to the > empty string, where other browsers treat it identically to "null". Treating null as empty string here may be sensible (no strong opinion either way) but removing the header when set to empty seems wrong. If header removal is really essential we should add a method for it. Regards, Maciej
Received on Sunday, 25 May 2008 23:31:33 UTC