>> "I want A, B, C or D - I can give you B or D - Then D - OK"
Yes, this. As long as I have the chance to determine B & D BEFORE the
content negotiation is complete. As opposed to having them fixed in code
by e.g. specifying to_json & to_html methods.
LP,
Jure
On 22/11/2019 02:04, Matemática
2090?
אורי
u...@speedy.net
On Thu, Nov 21, 2019 at 11:58 PM gordon wrote:
> Spec:
>
>- https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6761#section-6.3
>
> It didn't seem to work on IE edge. At the rate of browser updates I
> expect all browsers to support this by 2090. But it does make development
> on C
On Thu, Nov 21, 2019 at 3:03 AM Jure Erznožnik
wrote:
> If possible, could the logic determining "the best match for your options"
> be overridable?
>
Actually it is quite straightforward, the client set in the header of its
request all the media types it wants ("accepts as a response") with a
pr
I assume that just localhost still works with the above change?
If so then the fact that IE edge does not support it is no reason to not change
it because nothing changes with the current usage.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Django developers (C
Spec:
- https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6761#section-6.3
It didn't seem to work on IE edge. At the rate of browser updates I expect
all browsers to support this by 2090. But it does make development on
Chrome nice now =)
On Thu, Nov 21, 2019 at 4:49 PM Adam Johnson wrote:
> I’m all in favo
I’m all in favour of making development easier. Would be in favour of this
if I could see a source :) Also can you check the behaviour in more
browsers than Chrom(e|ium)? :)
On Thu, 21 Nov 2019 at 21:40, Gordon wrote:
> Good afternoon,
>
> It seems pretty straightforward to me as a win with no d
Good afternoon,
It seems pretty straightforward to me as a win with no downsides. Chrome
resolves subdomains of localhost as localhost. I did a little searching
(but forgot to keep the sources) and discovered that this behavior was
intentional and spec compliant. This is extremely handy for
If possible, could the logic determining "the best match for your
options" be overridable?
That way standard implementation would cater for 80/20 and everyone
would still have an option to customise further.
LP,
Jure
On 21/11/2019 02:22, Matemática A3K wrote:
On Wed, Nov 20, 2019 at 11:52
