2 ms·
Neither xhr nor subdomains sound like valid features/bugs. Just because they don’t agree with changes you want doesn’t mean it’s “abandoned”. As for why someon
by stephenr 8y ago
Neither xhr nor subdomains sound like valid features/bugs. Just because they don’t agree with changes you want doesn’t mean it’s “abandoned”.
As for why someone would request JS - you’re the one who suggested chrome/ff blockers are “more advanced”. And yet here we are on a thread about arbitrary code execution.
- ameshkov 8y agoI don't think our discussion can come to any compromise. You seem to believe that not doing anything is a good thing, and the API is already ideal. I have a different opinion. Well, it's okay to have different opinions.
- stephenr 8y ago> You seem to believe that not doing anything is a good thing, and the API is already ideal Not really. I've submitted a request for an enhancement myself (ability to auto-redirect to the canonical URL - to avoid the bullshit of AMP pages) but what you've suggested just don't seem like worthwhile or positive changes IMO. My argument wasn't "zero change is good" my argument is that it doesn't need much change and a stable API is hardly "abandonment".