- From: Chris Holland <frenchy@gmail.com>
- Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2005 17:31:30 -0800
On Mon, 28 Mar 2005 00:09:41 +0100, Jim Ley <jim.ley at gmail.com> wrote: > On Sun, 27 Mar 2005 13:12:03 -0800, Chris Holland <frenchy at gmail.com> wrote: > > But yeah, it also comes down to use cases and how badly we actually > > would *need* cookie support. For any kind of heavily transactional > > application that requires some sort of state persistence, we're more > > likely to be hitting our own host. > > If we're hitting our own host, there's no use case for the > cross-domain object at all. yes. that was my point. we'd be using a regular old XmlHttpRequest object which fully supports cookies. > > Jim. > -- Chris Holland http://chrisholland.blogspot.com/
Received on Sunday, 27 March 2005 17:31:30 UTC