On Thu, 18 Jun 2009 19:28:48 +0200, Jonas Sicking <jo...@sicking.cc> wrote:
On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 5:49 AM, Anne van Kesteren<ann...@opera.com>
wrote:
On Mon, 15 Jun 2009 17:00:46 +0200, Charles McCathieNevile
<cha...@opera.com> wrote:
On Sat, 13 Jun 2009 13:54:10 +0200, Anne van Kesteren
<ann...@opera.com>
wrote:
That definitely makes sense, though please take into consideration
that
for cross-origin loads exposing the file size cannot be done until all
HTTP headers have been received and the requested resource has opted
in
with CORS.
OK. One of the things I intended to keep leaving to the "host" spec was
definining what the size actually refers to.
I'd think we would like this to consistently refer to the entity body
for all usage of progress events as to not
confuse people using the API. It seems odd to take great care in order
and naming but not in consistent
implementation of the event objects.
At the very least we can define that for HTTP request, headers are not
used. For things like WebSocket and FutureAwesomeMegaAlienProtocol it
might make sense to do something different, perhaps.
Right. This is ISSUE-4 which was resolved to do it the way the spec does
it now (after having it defined in the spec when it was Web API issue 108).
While it makes sense to describe what most things do, this seems a case
where it might be reasonable to leave it to the spec. Although I am open
to defining it (like other stuff) with a default of not counting
transaction metadata/overhead, saying that specs can choose to override
that specifically if they need to.
cheers
Chaals
--
Charles McCathieNevile Opera Software, Standards Group
je parle français -- hablo español -- jeg lærer norsk
http://my.opera.com/chaals Try Opera: http://www.opera.com
