Re: Browser Geographic ID

• To: www-logging@w3.org
• Subject: Re: Browser Geographic ID
• From: hallam@zorch.w3.org
• Date: Mon, 25 Mar 96 11:42:23 -0500
• Cc: hallam@zorch.w3.org
• From hallam@zorch.w3.org Mon Mar 25 11: 42:24 1996
• In-Reply-To: Your message of "Mon, 25 Mar 96 11:20:57 EST." <Pine.SUN.3.91.960325110314.25294I-100000@bessel.nando.net>
• Message-Id: <9603251642.AA00814@zorch.w3.org>
• X-Mts: smtp

>Re 1002:
>Is it important enough to specify a tag? My vote is yes.
>Is it consistent enough to specify a tag? Hmm. If we stick to postal 
>   codes, possibly so, even though the codes themselves vary from country to 
>   country. For example, if I'm not mistaken, Canadian codes include 
>   alpha characters.
>Should this be within the core group of tags? Yes.

I think that the mechanism for obtaining the information is going to guide
us to the best way of expressing it. If for example geographic information
is being transported via a cookie then is would be more natural to use
cs(Cookie). 

I'm somewhat wary of making it look as if the log module is meant to analyse
the information.


	Phill

• Re: Browser Geographic ID
• From: "James E. Calloway" <jcallowa@nando.net>

• Prev: http://www.w3.org/pub/WWW/TR/WD-logfile.html
• Next: Re: Browser Geographic ID
• Index: Message index of www-logging@w3.org mailing list
• Thread: Thread index of www-logging@w3.org mailing list