- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Tue, 27 May 2008 18:11:22 +0200
- To: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
- CC: "public-webapi@w3.org" <public-webapi@w3.org>
Bjoern Hoehrmann wrote: > * Julian Reschke wrote: >> I also don't see why the client shouldn't have the option to set the >> Expect header; keep in mind that although 100-continue is the only >> expectation code defined in RFC2616, other codes can be defined as well, >> and it's not XHR's business to close that door. > > I think whether the client uses `Expect: 100-continue` is a decision > similar to deciding whether the client uses, say, a Transfer-Encoding. > The client may also be specifically configured to use a different > version of the protocol, like IE is configured to talk HTTP/1.0 to > proxy servers by default. Besides, the client may not even handle the > 100-continue response properly. What about "Expect: foobar"? BR, Julian
Received on Tuesday, 27 May 2008 16:12:05 UTC