- From: Martin J. Duerst <mduerst@ifi.unizh.ch>
- Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 19:48:22 +0100 (MET)
- To: http-wg%cuckoo.hpl.hp.com@hplb.hpl.hp.com
On Fri, 3 Jan 1997, Rob Hartill wrote: > There are lots of broken/misconfigured browsers out there. Some browsers > give users the impression that the order in which they list langauges is > important and others give the impression that "en-gb" and "en-us" are > reasonable substitutes for "en". It's a mess when people have something like > > Accept-Language: en-us de > > Unless Apache has a "en-us" variant I get mail from people asking why they > get German pages even though they set English first. As some people have > said to me "I know a little German so I added it after my American English > preference." In this case, the mess is most probably not with the browsers, but further up. RFC1766 defines language tags as independent entities, with syntactic structure using "-", but without hierarchy. This may make sense in some case, but not in others. For HTML language tagging (the LANG attribute), we explicitly overruled this (see RFC2070). For HTTP, using a similar overruling would make sense. This would mean that a server would check for "en-us", and if not found, for "en". > For Apache servers, MSIE 3.0 can be a nightmare. It sets the "Accept-Language" > based on a Windows local setting. The user doesn't know this has happened > and has no way to override it from the browser. Bad software design :-(. Caring for the user is a good thing, but not allowing the user to care for him/herself is not a good thing. They should fix it, we shouldn't fix the servers for them. Regards, Martin.
Received on Wednesday, 8 January 1997 10:50:25 UTC