W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg-old@w3.org > May to August 1996

Re: Conventions for Sharing User Agent Profiles

From: Fisher Mark <FisherM@is3.indy.tce.com>
Date: Fri, 16 Aug 96 11:18:00 PDT
To: "'David W. Morris'" <dwm@shell.portal.com>, 'Koen Holtman' <koen@win.tue.nl>, 'Simon Spero' <ses@tipper.oit.unc.edu>
Cc: HTTP Working Group <http-wg%cuckoo.hpl.hp.com@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Message-Id: <3214B9C0@MSMAIL.INDY.TCE.COM>
X-Mailing-List: <http-wg@cuckoo.hpl.hp.com> archive/latest/1376

>I also wrote:
>>It seems to me that only transparent content negotiation scales for
>>P_same values of 1 in 1 million or more (while also still protecting
>I now think that HTTP-NG negotiation will also scale for these P_same
>values, and that it will also allow privacy to be protected.  It is
>plain user profile caching, without any additional mechanisms, that
>won't scale.
>As for the main problem discussed in this thread, how to share data
>for negotiating around bugs the browser vendor does not care about: it
>seems that an internet draft to solve this problem would have to
>define a substantial amount of new stuff, beyond what is now in both
>HTTP-NG negotiation and transparent negotiation.

Since user agent negotiation is just a special case of content negotiation, 
we should definitely merge the two together for now.  HTTP-NG profile 
negotiation sounds nice, though...

David: I am still unclear from what you have written as to whether you are 
fighting browser bugs (tags not displayed properly, memory violations, etc.) 
or fighting presentation issues?  My firm hope is that as both major browser 
vendors move to style sheets, that much of the "negotiate on user-agent to 
enable proper presentation" stuff can go away.
Mark Leighton Fisher                   Thomson Consumer Electronics
fisherm@indy.tce.com                   Indianapolis, IN
Received on Friday, 16 August 1996 09:13:28 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:40:17 UTC