Re: Comment on latest CT Guideline Document

I think we have a terminology problem here, I assume that what you're 
saying is that an "allow list" (i.e. a list of sites for which 
transformation is allowed) should be recommended practice? I don't think 
I agree, anyway, in that it means that the CP then has great difficulty 
in getting changes to the behaviour of their site noticed.

Jo

On 11/06/2008 13:45, Gerlach, Heiko, VF-Group wrote:
> Hi All,
> 
> Page 7,
> 
> 1) Does Allow and Disallow lists mean Black and White lists?
> 2) If so, I strongly recommend to support a white lists within the CT 
> Guidelines. We do not know owner/stakeholder of most of the websites 
> which are "non made for mobile". So we can not expect their support.
> 
> But we can understand the customer needs and a customer could tell us 
> that content adaptation failed e.g. due to 200ok instead of 406.
> 
> This is why I think we do need a white list. For Urls contained in that 
> whitelist, Content adaptation shall be done in that way that a Mozilla 
> User Agent (non mobile user agent) is setup instead of the mobile user 
> agent.
> 
> This helps us to manage with the 406/200OK issue without buyin from the 
> site owner.
> 
> Clarification:
> I agree that blacklists should be ommitted. But white lists will deliver 
> a clear advantage.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *3.2.3 Control by Administrative or Other Arrangements.*
> 
> 
> The preferences of users and of servers* may* be ascertained by means 
> outside the scope of this document, for example:
> 
>     * the use by transforming proxies of a disallow list of Web sites
>       for which Content Transformation is known to diminish the user
>       experience of content or be ineffective;
> 
>     * the use by transforming proxies of an allow list of Web sites for
>       which Content Transformation is known to be necessary;
> 
>     * terms and conditions of service, as agreed between the user and
>       the Content Transformation service provider.
> 
> *Note:*
> 
> Allow and disallow lists generally cause intractable problems for 
> content providers since there is no mechanism for them to establish 
> which lists they should be on, nor any generic mechanism though which 
> they can check or change their status.
> 
> Cheers
> 
> *Heiko Gerlach*
> *Vendor Manager / Product Owner*
> *Global Consumer Internet Services & Platforms*
> *Tel: +49 211 820 2168*
> *Fax: +49 211 820 2141*
> *Mobile +49 172 20 40 50 7* 
> *E-Mail:* ___*heiko.gerlach@vodafone.com*_ 
> <mailto:heiko.gerlach@vodafone.com>** 
> * *
> 
> Vodafone Group Services GmbH
> Mannesmannufer 2, D-40213 Düsseldorf
> Amtsgericht Düsseldorf, HRB 53554
> Geschäftsführung: Dr. Joachim Peters, Rainer Wallek
>  
>  
> This message and any files or documents attached are confidential and 
> may also be legally privileged or protected by other legal rules. It is 
> intended only for the individual or entity named. If you are not the 
> named addressee or you have received this email in error, please inform 
> the sender immediately, delete it from your system and do not copy or 
> disclose it or its contents or use it for any purpose. Thank you.  
> Please also note that transmission cannot be guaranteed to be secure or 
> error-free.
> 
> *P* Please consider your environmental responsibility before printing 
> this e-mail
>  
>  
>

Received on Wednesday, 11 June 2008 15:19:21 UTC