Re: [REFERRER] Naming none and null policies

On Tue, Aug 19, 2014 at 10:37 AM, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>
wrote:

> On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 11:32 PM, Ángel <angel@16bits.net> wrote:
> > I would prefer if it was named with a more dissimilar word such as
> > ‘empty’ or ‘omit’.
>
> "omit" seems better than "empty" since I think that is the actual
> effect. "no-referrer" would be another option (similar to "no-cors").


Hrm. I thought the difference was clear, but I can understand how it could
be confusing. Changing to something explicit like 'no-referrer' sounds
pretty reasonable. We probably need to keep support for "None" around for
the meta tag, as it's currently used in WebKit and Blink.

WDYT of
https://github.com/w3c/webappsec/commit/b48b635f93a798da87c61e5b8c2d89d8b36567d8
?

Anne: Would you like to change the "none" keyword in Fetch as well?

--
Mike West <mkwst@google.com>
Google+: https://mkw.st/+, Twitter: @mikewest, Cell: +49 162 10 255 91

Google Germany GmbH, Dienerstrasse 12, 80331 München, Germany
Registergericht und -nummer: Hamburg, HRB 86891
Sitz der Gesellschaft: Hamburg
Geschäftsführer: Graham Law, Christine Elizabeth Flores
(Sorry; I'm legally required to add this exciting detail to emails. Bleh.)