<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: JSONRequest: Proposal for Cross-Domain Browser Service</title>
	<atom:link href="http://ajaxian.com/archives/jsonrequest-proposal-for-cross-domain-browser-service/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://ajaxian.com/archives/jsonrequest-proposal-for-cross-domain-browser-service</link>
	<description>Cleaning up the web with Ajax</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 09 Feb 2012 06:55:33 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mark Holton</title>
		<link>http://ajaxian.com/archives/jsonrequest-proposal-for-cross-domain-browser-service/comment-page-1#comment-252828</link>
		<dc:creator>Mark Holton</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 18 Jul 2007 05:43:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ajaxian.com/?p=977#comment-252828</guid>
		<description>...I&#039;d love to see this get implemented</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8230;I&#8217;d love to see this get implemented</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: William Siebler</title>
		<link>http://ajaxian.com/archives/jsonrequest-proposal-for-cross-domain-browser-service/comment-page-1#comment-153706</link>
		<dc:creator>William Siebler</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 30 Oct 2006 03:30:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ajaxian.com/?p=977#comment-153706</guid>
		<description>Sounds like a great to me.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sounds like a great to me.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: services</title>
		<link>http://ajaxian.com/archives/jsonrequest-proposal-for-cross-domain-browser-service/comment-page-1#comment-148807</link>
		<dc:creator>services</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 26 Oct 2006 19:11:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ajaxian.com/?p=977#comment-148807</guid>
		<description>I felt good about this post.   It confirmed for me some of the things Iâ€™ve been thinking about.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I felt good about this post.   It confirmed for me some of the things Iâ€™ve been thinking about.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: mr skin</title>
		<link>http://ajaxian.com/archives/jsonrequest-proposal-for-cross-domain-browser-service/comment-page-1#comment-146024</link>
		<dc:creator>mr skin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 25 Oct 2006 05:22:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ajaxian.com/?p=977#comment-146024</guid>
		<description>Deja Vu looks pretty interesting.  Kilmer and Denzel are some of my favorite actors.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Deja Vu looks pretty interesting.  Kilmer and Denzel are some of my favorite actors.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Software As She&#8217;s Developed - The Ajax Experience, May, 2006 (SF) Wrapup</title>
		<link>http://ajaxian.com/archives/jsonrequest-proposal-for-cross-domain-browser-service/comment-page-1#comment-10091</link>
		<dc:creator>Software As She&#8217;s Developed - The Ajax Experience, May, 2006 (SF) Wrapup</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 17 May 2006 11:07:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ajaxian.com/?p=977#comment-10091</guid>
		<description>[...] Speaking of Douglas Crockford, a few people mentioned his JSONRequest spec, which I blogged a couple of months back on Ajaxian. This is gaining momentum - Brendan is bullish and mentioned that it&#8217;s trivial to implement - though Laurel (IE) didn&#8217;t say too much. Hey, even if it&#8217;s only in Firefox, we&#8217;re going to see some cool apps come out of it. The basic idea is a safe cross-domain caller (no cookie transfer). [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Speaking of Douglas Crockford, a few people mentioned his JSONRequest spec, which I blogged a couple of months back on Ajaxian. This is gaining momentum &#8211; Brendan is bullish and mentioned that it&#8217;s trivial to implement &#8211; though Laurel (IE) didn&#8217;t say too much. Hey, even if it&#8217;s only in Firefox, we&#8217;re going to see some cool apps come out of it. The basic idea is a safe cross-domain caller (no cookie transfer). [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Out of Hanwell</title>
		<link>http://ajaxian.com/archives/jsonrequest-proposal-for-cross-domain-browser-service/comment-page-1#comment-4585</link>
		<dc:creator>Out of Hanwell</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 13 Mar 2006 17:42:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ajaxian.com/?p=977#comment-4585</guid>
		<description>&lt;strong&gt;JSONRequest Proposal&lt;/strong&gt;

Although the idea is (generally) a good one, I have some suggestions for improvement of Douglas Crockford&#039;s recent proposal for an XMLHttpRequest equivalent for JSON.


  The overloads for the JSONRequest function are confusing, and the parameter n...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>JSONRequest Proposal</strong></p>
<p>Although the idea is (generally) a good one, I have some suggestions for improvement of Douglas Crockford&#8217;s recent proposal for an XMLHttpRequest equivalent for JSON.</p>
<p>  The overloads for the JSONRequest function are confusing, and the parameter n&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Hugh</title>
		<link>http://ajaxian.com/archives/jsonrequest-proposal-for-cross-domain-browser-service/comment-page-1#comment-4550</link>
		<dc:creator>Hugh</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 12 Mar 2006 18:10:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ajaxian.com/?p=977#comment-4550</guid>
		<description>The full duplex functionality mentioned in the JSONRequest spec would be a very welcome addition to XmlHttpRequest as well. The current RPC-styled HTTP interaction is very limiting to web applications and leads to a great waste of bandwidth and adds too much latency to each call.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The full duplex functionality mentioned in the JSONRequest spec would be a very welcome addition to XmlHttpRequest as well. The current RPC-styled HTTP interaction is very limiting to web applications and leads to a great waste of bandwidth and adds too much latency to each call.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Hugh</title>
		<link>http://ajaxian.com/archives/jsonrequest-proposal-for-cross-domain-browser-service/comment-page-1#comment-4549</link>
		<dc:creator>Hugh</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 12 Mar 2006 17:44:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ajaxian.com/?p=977#comment-4549</guid>
		<description>I think the spec is a good start, but a lot things still have to be hashed out. For example, I could do without these arbitrary limits propsed:

&quot;Limits
There is a length limit on JSON texts of 250,000 Unicode characters. This limit is enforced in both directions. A request that exceeds the limit fails. In the worst case, 250,000 Unicode characters can consume 999,988 bytes.
JSON structures can be nested. A body with a nesting depth of 20 or more will be rejected.&quot;

Also, the random delay thing to prevent timing analysis attacks don&#039;t belong in the spec at all. This would provide little if no security above SSL at the expense of complicating any potential implementation.

All and all, it&#039;s a good first draft. More debate is required.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think the spec is a good start, but a lot things still have to be hashed out. For example, I could do without these arbitrary limits propsed:</p>
<p>&#8220;Limits<br />
There is a length limit on JSON texts of 250,000 Unicode characters. This limit is enforced in both directions. A request that exceeds the limit fails. In the worst case, 250,000 Unicode characters can consume 999,988 bytes.<br />
JSON structures can be nested. A body with a nesting depth of 20 or more will be rejected.&#8221;</p>
<p>Also, the random delay thing to prevent timing analysis attacks don&#8217;t belong in the spec at all. This would provide little if no security above SSL at the expense of complicating any potential implementation.</p>
<p>All and all, it&#8217;s a good first draft. More debate is required.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Andy</title>
		<link>http://ajaxian.com/archives/jsonrequest-proposal-for-cross-domain-browser-service/comment-page-1#comment-4533</link>
		<dc:creator>Andy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 12 Mar 2006 01:40:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ajaxian.com/?p=977#comment-4533</guid>
		<description>UTF-8 seems more like a play to avoid legacy stuff, by mandating  a more modern, consistent method of encoding.  By doing so, problems, security or otherwise, that might crop up in older implementations or in support code for older implementations are mitigated.  I suspect that many security problems come from ambiguous requirements or specifications.  By not having anything ambiguous, that leaves on less possible hole.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>UTF-8 seems more like a play to avoid legacy stuff, by mandating  a more modern, consistent method of encoding.  By doing so, problems, security or otherwise, that might crop up in older implementations or in support code for older implementations are mitigated.  I suspect that many security problems come from ambiguous requirements or specifications.  By not having anything ambiguous, that leaves on less possible hole.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Stephen Clay</title>
		<link>http://ajaxian.com/archives/jsonrequest-proposal-for-cross-domain-browser-service/comment-page-1#comment-4531</link>
		<dc:creator>Stephen Clay</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 12 Mar 2006 00:14:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ajaxian.com/?p=977#comment-4531</guid>
		<description>I&#039;m trying to boil this down: Essentially JSONRequest would allow pages on domain A to exchange with domain B without having to give B access to A&#039;s cookies/HTTP auth headers..? As I understand it this currently can&#039;t be done with current methods like dynamically creating SCRIPT elements..? What I don&#039;t completely get is what inherent security there is in strictly enforcing scriptly UTF-8 JSON data. Of course the timeout feature is nice too, emulating data push from the server.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m trying to boil this down: Essentially JSONRequest would allow pages on domain A to exchange with domain B without having to give B access to A&#8217;s cookies/HTTP auth headers..? As I understand it this currently can&#8217;t be done with current methods like dynamically creating SCRIPT elements..? What I don&#8217;t completely get is what inherent security there is in strictly enforcing scriptly UTF-8 JSON data. Of course the timeout feature is nice too, emulating data push from the server.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Stephen Clay</title>
		<link>http://ajaxian.com/archives/jsonrequest-proposal-for-cross-domain-browser-service/comment-page-1#comment-4530</link>
		<dc:creator>Stephen Clay</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 12 Mar 2006 00:11:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ajaxian.com/?p=977#comment-4530</guid>
		<description>I&#039;m trying to boil this down: JSONRequest would allow pages on domain A to exchange with domain B without having to give B access to A&#039;s cookies/HTTP auth headers. As I understand it this currently can&#039;t be done with current methods like dynamically creating SCRIPT elements..? True? What I don&#039;t completely get is what inherent security there is in strictly enforcing scriptly UTF-8 JSON data.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m trying to boil this down: JSONRequest would allow pages on domain A to exchange with domain B without having to give B access to A&#8217;s cookies/HTTP auth headers. As I understand it this currently can&#8217;t be done with current methods like dynamically creating SCRIPT elements..? True? What I don&#8217;t completely get is what inherent security there is in strictly enforcing scriptly UTF-8 JSON data.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

