[whatwg] Referer header sent with <a ping>?
lists at dolphinling.net
Sat Feb 2 18:59:58 PST 2008
Ian Hickson wrote:
> On Fri, 1 Feb 2008, Julian Reschke wrote:
>> Ian Hickson wrote:
>>> What do people think of this idea:
>>> We make "Referer" always have the value "PING".
>> Referer takes a relative reference, or a URI. Not a good idea.
> I see two ways forward here. One would be to redefine Referer to remove
> the relative URI thing, since, to my knowledge at least, nobody uses it.
> The other is that we can define the magic value to be "#PING" instead,
> since that's a non-conforming Referer value right now.
> Would that work for people? dolphinling? Darin?
If (X-)Ping-From/Ping-To are present, why is a referer needed at all? I'd say
just leave it out. If not, #PING works for me.
Cookies and authentication headers I'm ambivalent about; no one's made a
persuasive case either way for them, and I haven't looked myself.
>>> We add two headers, "X-Ping-From" which has the value of the page that
>>> had the link, and "X-Ping-To" which has the value of the page that is
>>> being opened.
(sorry for the double copy, Hixie, forgot to CC the list the first time)
More information about the whatwg