W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > July to September 2008

Re: qvalue *, was: Re: Issue 113

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Mon, 04 Aug 2008 20:22:19 +0200
Message-ID: <489748DB.8000809@gmx.de>
To: Frank Ellermann <hmdmhdfmhdjmzdtjmzdtzktdkztdjz@gmail.com>
CC: ietf-http-wg@w3.org

Frank Ellermann wrote:
> Yves Lafon wrote:
> 
>> Can you point to a specific non-interoperable issue?
>> The example you gave didn't seem hopelessly broken.
> 
> | And <http://delorie.com:81/> tells me that it is in
> | fact Accept-Charset: windows-1252,utf-8;q=0.7,*;q=0.7
> 
> * and utf-8 have the same <qvalue>, and one of the two
> can't be serious.  Either * should be actuallly 0.001
> (here: anything less than 1 and 0.7, but not 0), or
> utf-8 should be anything between 0.7 and 1, say 0.701
> 
> Julian found a similar oddity with his UA:
> 
> | Which UA?
> |
> | My FF3 says:
> |
> | Accept-Charset: ISO-8859-1,utf-8;q=0.7,*;q=0.7
> |
> | ...so I don't see any problem here.
> 
> I see a problem, the <qvalue> of * is not smaller than 
> all other non-zero <qvalue>s.  BTW, my IUT is an FF 2.

So FF sends a header that contains unnecessary information (include 
utf-8, where leaving it out would mean the same).

I'm still not sure how this is a problem, unless you can show that this 
causes interop problems somewhere.

 > ...

BR, Julian
Received on Monday, 4 August 2008 18:23:06 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 06:50:54 GMT