W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-talk@w3.org > November to December 1995

Re: Content negotiation

From: Kee Hinckley <nazgul@utopia.com>
Date: Wed, 8 Nov 1995 12:31:15 -0500
Message-Id: <v02130506acc69960ff0e@[]>
To: George Phillips <phillips@cs.ubc.ca>
Cc: www-talk@w3.org (return)
At 8:59 PM 11/7/95, George Phillips wrote:
>is unavailable.  A pretty reliable "site" would be the browser itself.
>It would keep a port open listening for HTTP Accept: extension requests.
>To avoid caching problems you'd want URLs with the browser version in them.
>Most browsers would have two paths, one for what it can do at the top level
>and one for what image formats can be inlined.  Firewalls might be a problem

Firewalls would definitely be a problem.  But moreso is that this mechanism
works for things like HTML extensions (which are standard across all
versions of a browser) but not for content type.  You and I may both use
Browser A, but that doesn't mean we both can view image format B.

Kee Hinckley      Utopia Inc. - Cyberspace Architects    617.768.5500
nazgul@utopia.com                               http://www.utopia.com/

I'm not sure which upsets me more: that people are so unwilling to accept
responsibility for their own actions, or that they are so eager to regulate
everyone else's.
Received on Wednesday, 8 November 1995 12:54:30 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:32:58 UTC