On Mon, 26 Feb 2007 15:04:09 +0100, Alexey Proskuryakov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
It is not really obvious to me why this is even desirable - isn't it easier to serve as XHTML in cases when responseXML is needed? After all, XMLHttpRequest is not a general purpose HTTP library, so we don't need to worry about arbitrary content.
I think it actually is a general purpose HTTP library, despite the name. (For ECMAScript anyway.)
-- Anne van Kesteren <http://annevankesteren.nl/> <http://www.opera.com/>
