[whatwg] ContextAgnosticXmlHttpRequest: an informal RFC

Chris Holland frenchy at gmail.com
Wed Mar 9 08:42:25 PST 2005

On Wed, 9 Mar 2005 12:14:52 +0000, Jim Ley <jim.ley at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 9 Mar 2005 01:31:50 -0800, Chris Holland <frenchy at gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Wed, 9 Mar 2005 08:57:12 +0000, Jim Ley <jim.ley at gmail.com> wrote:
> >If the User Agent is a traditional web
> > browser, the only way a given document could ever initiate a request
> > to a host different from the one that served it, would be through a
> > ContextAgnosticHttpRequest (i'm liking this name less and less, sorry
> > about that), and this request would infallibly send, in every request,
> > the full URI of the document initiating the request, as the value of
> > the "Referer" header.
> Are you sure you're not advocating this to get around privacy based
> proxies of the type that normally disable such referrer based content
> so as to reliably block
> privacy invasions?

well, if a proxy starts filtering out http headers sent by the client,
there isn't much we can do about that now is there. heh.

> > > Please don't have any solution that limits the user to XML, it's a
> > > pointless arbritrary restriction that offers nothing but serious
> > > performance hits to the client, and complications to the user.
> >
> > well it would appear XML validity already is a restriction, but okee.
> Nope, there's no such restriction, and very few of the implementations
> that I know of that use xmlhttprequest on websites use XML.

... ok ... google maps does. a9 does. ask jeeves does. but ok, fair
enough, many other developers just may not. anyway, i should have left
this issue to another debate in the first place, it shouldn't really
affect design for this feature.

thanks for the feedback! :)


Chris Holland

More information about the whatwg mailing list