This is an archived snapshot of W3C's public bugzilla bug tracker, decommissioned in April 2019. Please see the home page for more details.
The list of "author request headers" mentions Content-Transfer-Encoding. This is confusing as there is no such header field in HTTP (there is one in email, though).
I think you are confusing author request headers with headers that cannot be set by authors. What is wrong with prohibiting Content-Transfer-Encoding?
(In reply to comment #1) > I think you are confusing author request headers with headers that cannot be > set by authors. What is wrong with prohibiting Content-Transfer-Encoding? a) yes, sorry. b) as I said: what's the point in forbidding it when it doesn't exist?
I don't know.
Julian is right: there is no such header, so prohibiting it makes no sense. Why was that text added to the spec? Did it actually mean to prohibit setting Content-Encoding or Transfer-Encoding (or maybe both?)
Not sure. The header has been there since the draft of June 2007.
(In reply to comment #5) > Not sure. The header has been there since the draft of June 2007. See also <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapi/2008May/0189.html>.
Transfer-Encoding is forbidden. I think the idea must have been to forbid Content-Encoding.
I removed Content-Transfer-Encoding. http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/xhr/rev/33501b9188cb It was originally added in 1.68 of http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2006/webapi/XMLHttpRequest/Overview.src.html by the way without a clear mailing list discussion associated with it.