W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-bpwg-ct@w3.org > November 2008

Re: [CTG] Draft 2008-11-07 / http-equiv / WML

From: Eduardo Casais <casays@yahoo.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2008 07:13:12 -0800 (PST)
To: public-bpwg-ct@w3.org
Message-ID: <7572.25868.qm@web45009.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>

>That said, my preference would be to say that CT
> Proxies should treat WML content as though it had a 
> no-transform specified in it, 

Seems like a vote for (c). However, in departure to a 
strict no-transform interpretation, I would still allow a
CT-proxy to perform the transformations specified by
the standards (i.e. WBXML encoding), since vendors
may be delivering complete packages that include both
WAP gateway and CT-proxy functionality (at least the
Nokia WAP Gateway functions like this; its WAP encoding
modules are integrated into a general content adaptation
framework).

> since there is no way within 
> existing mechanisms reliably for a server to tell CT
> Proxies anything else.

Yes, that is the fundamental difficulty.

E.Casais


      
Received on Monday, 24 November 2008 15:15:19 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 24 November 2008 15:15:20 GMT