On 2012-02-27 11:32, Gervase Markham wrote:
On 27/02/12 09:41, Henri Sivonen wrote:
I think it would make sense to carefully police additions to HTTP
headers beyond User-Agent. (Also removals, I guess, from the site
compat perspective.) Proposals to add stuff pop up from time to time
and they tend to flop with the request left bloated. (Notable
exception: Accept-Encoding: gzip. DNT: 1 seems to be off to a good
start, too, but it's too early to tell what happens to it on the long
term.)
One failure that added bloat that I'm partially guilty for is the
Accept header. Wouldn't you say good riddance to Accept if we could as
far as site compat goes?
Accept: is certainly on my personal hit-list, and was my other example
of a header which excites controversy. (Or, at least, it has in the past
- it might not do so today.) I would work on eliminating Accept by
first, issuing a wide call (via hacks blog and other places) for
existing examples of people using content-negotiation via Accept. If, as
I would suspect, there are few or none, we can look at eliminating it by
doing some web scraping and seeing if it makes a difference, like we
have done with User-Agent:.
The problem IMHO isn't content negotiation per se (for instance, in
Ajax), but web servers that fail if Accept is absent.
Best regards, Julian
_______________________________________________
dev-tech-network mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-tech-network
