W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ua@w3.org > October to December 1998

Re: Browser sniffing to CG

From: Daniel Dardailler <danield@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 09 Dec 1998 21:19:30 +0100
Message-Id: <199812092019.VAA10983@www47.inria.fr>
To: Al Gilman <asgilman@access.digex.net>
cc: w3c-wai-ua@w3.org, w3c-wai-cg@w3.org

I think we should ask for a informational note to be added in the HTTP
spec saying it's bad to do browser sniffing in general and really bad
to be discriminatory about it.

Exact wording to be proposed by PF.

I am personally not in favor adding profile like things to HTTP to
allow for "clean" browser sniffing (e.g. my screen is this res, I
don't have a mouse, etc) 

It think HTTP has enough content negociation and the architecture
already in place is flexible enough (where you first get the HTML/XML,
then the attached pieces - if you need them) to do the job right
(which should not preclude us to improve css categorization by media,
but this is not HTTP related)


> to follow up on what Daniel Dardailler said:
> 
> > Danield: related to Browser sniffing, it is a server issue but we
> >     could ask the HTTP WG to add a note about it
> > Charles: do we want to add negocation of UA capabilities
> >     there are other ways to do that (CSS + media)
> 
> Did we agree to take this issue back to the CG?  It seems to me
> that this area is one where
> 
> 	- the WAI would probably like to make a statement
> 	- it seems to fall in a crack between the scopes of
> 		the content and browser guidelines.
> 
> The WAI would like to make a statement concerning
> nondiscrimination in the service of information.  We can work
> with W3C and WSG on this, because I think Tim is quite unhappy
> with the commercial forays into defeating the universal meeting
> ground qualities of the WWW.  Maybe it goes in the author guidelines
> as a not under alternative pages.
> 
> Al
Received on Wednesday, 9 December 1998 15:20:06 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 October 2009 06:48:38 GMT