- From: Jeffrey Yasskin <jyasskin@google.com>
- Date: Sun, 27 Jul 2014 13:26:32 -0700
- To: Ilya Grigorik <igrigorik@google.com>
- Cc: Mike West <mkwst@google.com>, Devdatta Akhawe <dev.akhawe@gmail.com>, Joshua Peek <josh@joshpeek.com>, "public-webappsec@w3.org" <public-webappsec@w3.org>, Anne van Kesteren <annevankesteren@gmail.com>, Jake Archibald <jakearchibald@google.com>, Alex Russell <slightlyoff@google.com>
On Thu, Jul 24, 2014 at 10:30 AM, Ilya Grigorik <igrigorik@google.com> wrote: > > On Thu, Jul 24, 2014 at 8:52 AM, Jeffrey Yasskin <jyasskin@google.com> > wrote: >> >> > On Thu, Jul 24, 2014 at 4:04 AM, Devdatta Akhawe <dev.akhawe@gmail.com> >> > wrote: >> >> For request headers, how about a "CH-Context: ServiceWorker"? That >> >> makes >> >> more sense to me than "Service-Worker: script" and it also follows the >> >> client hint format. >> > >> > This seems like a reasonable way of pushing the data up to the server, >> > and >> > it's probably useful for server-side response prioritization regardless: >> > Ilya? WDYT? >> >> I've spec'ed this suggestion at >> https://github.com/slightlyoff/ServiceWorker/pull/384. Feel free to >> tell us to spec something else, of course. > > > FWIW, the CH- prefix may be unnecessary and you can simplify it to just > "CSP" and "Context". Some background: > https://github.com/igrigorik/http-client-hints/issues/24 I'm happy to apply this suggestion, but it'd be nice to hear some support for it from other folks on the list.
Received on Sunday, 27 July 2014 20:27:22 UTC