- From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>
- Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2014 12:48:25 +0200
- To: duanyao <duanyao@ustc.edu>
- Cc: WHATWG <whatwg@whatwg.org>
On Thu, Jul 17, 2014 at 2:26 PM, duanyao <duanyao@ustc.edu> wrote: > I think rule 5.1 should be applied to both static fetching and XHR consistently. Browsers should set Content-Type header to local files' actual type for XHR, and interpret > them accordingly. But firefox developers think this would break some existing codes that already rely on firefox's behavior > (see https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1037762). > > What do you think? Basically, this comes down to what http://fetch.spec.whatwg.org/#basic-fetch should do. "For now, unfortunate as it is, file and ftp URLs are left as an exercise for the reader." There's an enormous amount of tricky things to define around file URLs, this being one of them. My theory to date has been that defining those things has less benefit than defining other things, such as parsing URLs or the way fetching works in general. If someone were to sort the issues out and get implementations to converge I would certainly not be opposed to including the result of such work in the specification. -- http://annevankesteren.nl/
Received on Tuesday, 29 July 2014 10:48:56 UTC