- From: Chris Lilley <Chris.Lilley@sophia.inria.fr>
- Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 15:55:15 +0100 (MET)
- To: koen@win.tue.nl, ftang@netscape.com, http-wg%cuckoo.hpl.hp.com@hplb.hpl.hp.com, Koen Holtman <koen@win.tue.nl>
- Cc: Alan_Barrett/DUB/Lotus.LOTUSINT@crd.lotus.com, Chris.Lilley@sophia.inria.fr, Ed_Batutis/CAM/Lotus@crd.lotus.comi18ngrp, bobj@netscape.com, mduerst@ifi.unizh.ch, www-international@w3.org
On Jan 9, 10:46am, Koen Holtman wrote: > Even if procedural reasons do not allow adding the wildcard to 1.1, it can > still be defined on top of 1.1. I do so in the upcoming revision of the > transparent content negotiation draft. Here is the text: > [...] > Accept-Charset: iso-8859-5;q=0.8, *;q=0.9 > > This specification does assign a special meaning: servers and > clients capable of transparent content negotiation must take "*" as > a wildcard matching every character set not explicitly mentioned > elsewhere in the Accept-Charset header. As an example, the above > header assigns a quality value of 0.9 to the iso-8859-2 charset. I would urge you to add additional wording such that, in the absence of an explicit q factor, the wildcard has a default, low q factor such as 0.1. This applies to Accept and Accept-Language as well. It would correct a sitiation where browsers send a list of things they do accept, followed by *, and this is (currently) often taken to mean exactly the same as if they had only sent the *. Some existing servers allocate 0.1 to a wildcard (and a somewhat higher value to a partial wildcard, such as audio/*). It would be excellent to have this behaviour explicitly part of the specification. -- Chris Lilley, W3C [ http://www.w3.org/ ] Graphics and Fonts Guy The World Wide Web Consortium http://www.w3.org/people/chris/ INRIA, Projet W3C chris@w3.org 2004 Rt des Lucioles / BP 93 +33 (0)4 93 65 79 87 06902 Sophia Antipolis Cedex, France
Received on Friday, 10 January 1997 07:04:40 UTC