W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-bpwg-comments@w3.org > July to September 2008

Re: transcoders bad

From: Sean Owen <srowen@google.com>
Date: Tue, 5 Aug 2008 17:10:55 -0400
Message-ID: <e920a71c0808051410m6ee6d783p1c73c2256412fcc5@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Luca Passani" <passani@eunet.no>
Cc: public-bpwg-comments@w3.org, "Terren Suydam" <terren@singleclicksystems.com>

On Tue, Aug 5, 2008 at 5:03 PM, Luca Passani <passani@eunet.no> wrote:
> While I am here, I think it is a shame that W3C has accepted Novarra's
> attempt to redefine the mobile web, and I can't believe that you are
> supporting this with a straight face. Are you the same Sean Owen behind the
> W3C Best Practices?

I am embarrassed to say I have not followed this group closely in the
last few months. What are we talking about so I know what to be
outraged by? :)

> Look, the great majority of mobile site is built on top of UA detection. So,
> a transcoder which runs all HTTP traffic and changes the UA is abusive and I
> will tell the world that this is not acceptable no matter how much you keep
> trying to mud the water.

Yeah I have come to understand your point. So, sure, send no-transform
in all cases. User-Agent doesn't matter there. You want to send
no-transform but also know how to customize the content, based on
User-Agent, that will be sent straight back to the phone. You need to
consult User-Agent. You don't want to consult X-Device-User-Agent.

It strikes me as quibbling, and I dismiss it, perhaps cold-heartedly,
as "just two lines of code". I understand the position that you
shouldn't have to do a single thing differently to appease these
transcoders. I do think that, in the abstract, it is more logical for
a transcoder to change the UA. I understand your practical argument
against it.

I know am I a broken record now, but even if I shared your
revolutionary spirit and indignation... and I am not unsympathetic...
wouldn't you want to also solve your problem while decrying the
tyrants? I think this doc is just trying to sketch a realistic
solution. You may disagree on the details, yeah, that's OK. I think
it's a shame to call it names though since I think it is a more
sincere effort to solve problems for real developers. A professional
working group does not have the same luxury of casting stones from a

But I do...

Received on Tuesday, 5 August 2008 21:11:51 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:01:50 UTC