[whatwg] Referer header sent with <a ping>?

[dolphinling]

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.
> 
> Interesting.
> 
> 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)

-- 
dolphinling
<http://dolphinling.net/>