On Mon, 12 May 2008 17:48:48 +0200, Stewart Brodie
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
The only reason I suggested forcing implementations to use "*/*" as the
value for an automatically added header is that it preserves the
semantics of the request, since this is the default to be assumed by
HTTP servers in the absence of the header (RFC2396, section 14.1).
Yes, I understood that.
Should clients be warned that failing to set an Accept header explicitly
will lead to inconsistent behaviour between different UAs?
I think user agent developers are very well aware that differences in
implementation leads to different behavior :-)
By using values other than "*/*", the UA is overriding the script's type
preference, as it restricts the types that the server may return -
behaviour which I would
class as a bug. The UA isn't going to be processing the returned entity
body - the script is. I realise that the whole problem is caused by the
new SHOULD requirement in the first place, but, unfortunately, it is
needed for web compatibility.
If scripts would like to perform content negotiation they should set the
Accept header themselves.
Kind regards,
--
Anne van Kesteren
<http://annevankesteren.nl/>
<http://www.opera.com/>
