RE: URLs and access issues

"Accept" headers were OK in the days when a MIME-type was a MIME-type and you didn't have to worry about device/browser diversity.

For example, "text/html" isn't always enough. It that for iMode, PDA, TV or PC?

MIME types are not always sufficiently detailed. Of course, instead of the Accept header you have have a header referring to a profile, or profiles, wherein more accurate information is located. CC/PP anyone? Of course, this means that accurate profiles are required, and managing such a collection of information is not as easy as it sounds, as the people in the DDWG will tell you.

The q factor is generally helpful when you have a variety of ways to deliver the content, but the "broad-stroke" approach of MIME types makes this less useful. You could, of course, put q info into a more discerning profile...

---Rotan

-----Original Message-----
From: Daniel Barclay [mailto:daniel@fgm.com]
Sent: 19 August 2005 19:32
To: public-bpwg@w3.org
Cc: Rotan Hanrahan; ajaynaphade@jataayusoft.com; Neil Thompson
Subject: Re: URLs and access issues


Rotan Hanrahan wrote:

> As the iMode experience shows, the Accept header isn't always enough.

Would it be enough (on the server side) if browsers actually set
Accept headers appropiately?


> And don't you just love to see "*/*" in an Accept header :)

Yeah, there is that problem.

If browsers set the quality factor appropriately, would that solve
the problem?


Daniel

Received on Friday, 19 August 2005 18:42:44 UTC