- From: William A. Rowe, Jr. <wrowe@rowe-clan.net>
- Date: Thu, 04 Jan 2007 15:11:08 -0600
- To: Paul Leach <paulle@windows.microsoft.com>
- CC: "Travis Snoozy (Volt)" <a-travis@microsoft.com>, ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Paul Leach wrote: > I don't think its worth making that change. Agreed. > We need to be considerate of the people reading the updated spec and > comparing it with the old one to see if they need to do anything. The > diffs should be minimized, and since this one won't actually cause > anyone to do anything to their code, it might just as well be omitted. Moreso... > A strict interpretation of this would mean that other non-user-agent > clients (e.g., proxies) "MUST NOT" give an Accept-Language header in > their requests, because they can not (easily) give users a "choice of > linguistic preference". That could lead to all sorts of silliness (e.g., > proxies stripping Accept-Language before forwarding) that very likely > isn't intended. Well, first off, you presume the spec replaces common sense of the authors of said proxy, but worse... > I propose the following fix: > > If the choice is not made available, then the Accept-Language header field > MUST NOT be given in the request. not made available by ??...?? I presume you mean the end user of the proxy. But if the proxy can discern a locale by, say, the regional IP assignment of the end client, then that would be it's choice to 'fill in the gap' here. Or a special purpose proxy could very well prefer a specific language family based on it's anticipated user base. I'd suggest we please leave the existing text alone and leave it to the implementor to determine if and how Accept-Language should be presented.
Received on Thursday, 4 January 2007 21:11:34 UTC