Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [json] Glad to be here, some questions?

Expand Messages
  • Tatu Saloranta
    On Tue, Jul 21, 2009 at 3:01 PM, Kris Zyp wrote: ... I fully agree -- I would prefer using proper content/media types, since those do serve
    Message 1 of 5 , Jul 21, 2009
    • 0 Attachment
      On Tue, Jul 21, 2009 at 3:01 PM, Kris Zyp<kriszyp@...> wrote:
      ...
      >> AFAICT, very few JSON services use application/json, so your code
      >> should be tolerant of responses with other Content-Type header values.
      >>
      > Yes, the web is awash with abuses, so it is wise to be tolerant of
      > responses, but I wouldn't recommend contributing to the mess. Dojo's
      > JSON HTTP/REST client (JsonRestStore) does properly set the Content-Type
      > to application/json for same-origin PUT and POST requests. Needless to
      > say that is the client I would recommend :). (of course I am biased, and
      > I am sure web_send is good as well, Tyler's work is excellent).

      I fully agree -- I would prefer using proper content/media types,
      since those do serve purpose esp. regarding intermediaries.

      Another thing to consider is that JSON is hardly only sent by
      browsers: most of my own use cases are for services communicating (or
      in general non-browser clients). So it is not reasonable to assume
      that most decisions be driven by what browsers do -- yes, JSON is
      convenient for that use case, but applicability extends well beyond
      that domain.

      -+ Tatu +-
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.