W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > October to December 2011

Re: Possible issue: Accept-language priority based on language order

From: Dale Anderson <dra@redevised.net>
Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2011 18:18:04 -0800
Message-ID: <CANNRn6LHqOkzDR1-ZNNiz2tX7cGnkvEV_OnQOvVJgW=kvexREw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Cc: Amos Jeffries <squid3@treenet.co.nz>, ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Hi Julian, can you post the low-down on that dataset or email me on the
side I'm on paid time-off (not that HTTP isn't a pure pleasure, I assure
you I'm very fond especially of transmitting those texts bearing
Hyperlinks) but I will shoot the facts of the matter over to my time-on
colleages at F5 etc. Where's the data,

Thanks, (from the top of the world. Home office).

Dale Anderson

:)


2011/11/23 Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>

> On 2011-11-23 23:29, Amos Jeffries wrote:
>
>> ...
>>
>> I've been keeping an eye on this since implementing language negotiation
>> in Squid.
>>
>> It appears that nearly all agents are sending the language codes sorted
>> by q value anyway. Whether they send the q value or not it is still
>> possible to optimize by using the left-most wins assumption.
>>
>> If anyone is interested in doing a deeper analysis I have a dataset
>> available covering the last year on several networks linking the
>> Accept-Language and User-Agent header pair.
>> ...
>>
>
> Analysis would be good.
>
> I'm skeptical because we're not really allowed to make changes breaking
> previously compliant implementations without *very* good reasons.
>
> I'm also not too enthusiastic having to consider whether this would be
> *specific* to Accept-Language, or apply to all Accept headers.
>
> Best regards, Julian
>
>
Received on Thursday, 24 November 2011 02:18:32 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 06:51:50 GMT