This is a good article. What I only understood after reading it a second time is this: The quotes from other blogs and articles using the term "cross-origin" ar

This is a good article. What I only understood after reading it a second time is this: The quotes from other blogs and articles using the term "cross-origin" are not wrong, just imprecise. They use cross-origin when they mean cross-origin and cross-site. I think the term cross-origin could - and should - be avoided altogether. In the end of the day a request is either * same-origin (which implies same-site) * same-site (cross-origin or not, doesn't matter) * cross-site (implying cross-origin, again doesn't matter) That's all there is to it, and sufficiently describes the situation. cross-origin on the other hand is rather ambiguous when used alone.