- From: Koen Holtman <koen@win.tue.nl>
- Date: Wed, 1 Nov 1995 21:53:08 +0100 (MET)
- To: Balint Nagy Endre <bne@bne.ind.eunet.hu>
- Cc: mogul@pa.dec.com, http-wg%cuckoo.hpl.hp.com@hplb.hpl.hp.com
Balint Nagy Endre: >Koen's modelling does not contain Accept-Language, which will be important >in future, adding some bytes to headers. [...] >Accept-Language: hu; q=1, en; q=0.75, ru; q=0.5, de;q=0.25 >(60 bytes, including CRLF) Well, 200 bytes plus 60 bytes for Accept-Language is still a lot lower than the 500 byte request messages at which header reuse would get moderately interesting. And of course, there is no need to ever send Accept-Language headers at all is we have a good(*) specification and implementation of reactive content negotiation. (*) By my defition of good, that is: I feel that good reactive negotiation will always give me a `multiple options' or `none acceptable' with the alternatives if my accept headers are missing or ambiguous. A browser should only send Accept-language headers if it suspects that doing so will prevent a reactive content negotiation cycle. Thus, you start sending Accept-language if you got a `multiple options' response to an earlier request on that server, and it turned out that language was relevant in the options. Also, in a hash-based content negotiation scheme, the Accept-language header could be hashed along with the Accept header. Basically, everything I said about Accept: im my report also holds for Accept-language: . >[Jeffrey Mogul writes:] >> I think Larry Masinter's hash-based approach still seems like the >> right one here. Balint Nagy Endre: >Agree. I do not like the hash-based approach very much. It seems to me that it is a special case of reactive negotiation. One of the problems I have with hash-based content selection is that it is that it places a high penalty (one round trip time) on the first content selection by the server. That means that putting up a home page with inline links that serve .gifs in the normal case, but .jpgs if the browser can display them is less attractive. Uner normal reactive negotiation, you could send either Accept: image/gif image/jpg or Accept: image/gif and no extra round trip would be required. Koen.
Received on Wednesday, 1 November 1995 12:59:24 UTC