W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > July to September 2010

Re: [#232] User-Agent Guidelines (proposal)

From: Adam Barth <w3c@adambarth.com>
Date: Mon, 20 Sep 2010 02:35:40 -0700
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=L=Q7FKy7a3ui6fj=TL7jd4CtRXBwjmfbRYFcy@mail.gmail.com>
To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
Cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 2:27 AM, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> wrote:
> On 20/09/2010, at 7:24 PM, Adam Barth wrote:
>> On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 2:14 AM, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> wrote:
>>> Likewise, implementations are encouraged not to use the product tokens of other implementations in order to declare compatibility with them, as this circumvents the purpose of the field.
>>
>> Although noble, many implementations will ignore this advice.  I can
>> tell you that there are several folks in the Chromium project that are
>> adamant about fixing the User-Agent mess, but they're crushed by the
>> compatibility requirements.  In particular, including the token
>> "Safari" in Chrome's User-Agent string is massively important to
>> making the browser actually work in the real world.
>
> Yes, I think that's probably the most tenuous part of the proposal -- and one reason why it's just "encouraged."
>
> OTOH, if things are really that dire, maybe we should standardise the value to start with "Mozilla/4.0" and just move on ;)

Some of us still hold onto the dream that this can be fixed at some point.  :)

Adam
Received on Monday, 20 September 2010 09:36:38 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 06:51:25 GMT