> > Could most of this be handled with media type registration? E.g., if > > Netscape were to accept: text/html and text/netscape-2.0-html, then > > Microsoft's browser could express its willingness to accept either or > > both. Is this a workable solution? > I agree with others that this is probably not adequate for the > distinctions content providers want to make. Just specifying text/netscape-html probably works for 90% of the content providers who care, as most of them seem to want nothing more than to distinguish netscape from the rest of the world. Adding a version number to the MIME type (either as text/netscape-#.#-html or as text/netscape-html; version=2.0) would probably keep 90% of the rest happy, as they get the exact same information from this Accept: header as they are now getting from the User-agent: header. MS could then achieve the same effect they got with the User-Agent: hack by adding a single type to the Accept: headers. This removes their incentive to do user-agent hacking. This should make the few content providers who care enough to distinguish between more than a fraction of a percent of the available browsers happier as well. Yes, it's not a complete solution, and it's not perfect. But it solves the majority of users problems, and is a lot better than what we've got now. <mikeReceived on Monday, 29 January 1996 13:09:59 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 October 2009 08:38:38 GMT