W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-international@w3.org > January to March 1997

Re: Translations

From: Martin J. Duerst <mduerst@ifi.unizh.ch>
Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 20:14:45 +0100 (MET)
To: "M.T. Carrasco Benitez" <carrasco@innet.lu>
cc: www-international@www10.w3.org
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.95q.970118200513.476H-100000@enoshima>
On Fri, 17 Jan 1997, M.T. Carrasco Benitez wrote:

> > > 5) The Accept-Language should be a ordered "preference list".  There is no 
> > > need to quantify the preference of the user.
> 
> I accept that the q is for creating the "preference list" as long as 
> there is a "non quantifing mode"; i.e.,
> 
>  Spanish 0.9
>  English 0.8
>  French  0.7
> 
> means that I prefererence list is Spanish, English, French without 
> quantification.

I don't understand this "without quantification". Do you think
you need this because you know that you read Spanish better than
English, and so on, but you don't know how much better? Or do
you think it is needed to avoid click-tracing?
What would you expect the server to do when receiving a "preference
list without quantification"? It has to use *some* q values anyway,
doesn't it?


 
> > The problem with q on Accept-Language is privacy. One part of this
> > problem is the identification with some language minority, which
> > may be done independently of q factors. The other is click tracing.
> > For this, in certain cases even just the set of languages provides
> > enough information. To alleviate the problem of click-tracing and
> > privacy, in addition to the provisions in the http specs, it might
> > be a good idea to agree to restrict the q values set by browsers
> > to a limited set (e.g. 1.0, 0.8, 0.6, 0.4, 0.2, 0.0). This will
> > allow a wide expression of relative preferences, while it will
> > avoid click-tracing on something like "the guy that has Japanese
> > at 0.4586794".
> 
> There should be at least to modes of transmiting the languages preference 
> list:
> 
>  - Get the best doc.    (list communicated)
>  - Get the default doc. (list not communicated)
> 
> A further refinement could be to request the best doc only from friendly 
> servers.

The second mode (get the default doc when not sending any Accept-Language
data) already exists. The first mode also exists; it sends the overall
best document considering your language preferences and the quality of
the documents.
I don't know what you mean by "best doc only from friendly servers", or
why that would be needed.

Regards,	Martin.
Received on Saturday, 18 January 1997 14:23:30 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 19:16:46 GMT