- From: Andrew Daviel <advax@triumf.ca>
- Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2007 17:08:56 -0800 (PST)
- To: Adrien de Croy <adrien@qbik.com>
- cc: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
On Wed, 5 Dec 2007, Adrien de Croy wrote: > > My 2c on the draft. Thanks > > There is also considerable discussion on cache control implications and the > Vary tag. I'm struggling to see where something that varies by geographic > location would be otherwise invariant (i.e. not vary on time, or other > factors which are currently in the control of the server). For instance the I'm not really suggesting that these usage cases would be cacheable, I just wanted to do it "right" so that incorrect cached responses would not be returned. We also specified a country or region code that is more likely to give cacheable pages than a numeric position, and Vary seems a better way than just setting Cache-Control: no-cache. > There are technologies already that can use a browser and CGI to transfer the > requisite information about location without using HTTP headers. You can use > Ajax to asynchronously POST location information to a script (i.e. to track > moving hosts). Also, wherever there is user-input required to define > location, this could just as easily be in a form to post rather than in a > custom configuration dialog in a browser (that would then require browser > vendor support). One of the authors has a module for mobile IE to take a GPS location and add it to each request, while I was playing with an HTTP proxy that does something similar. So the user isn't entering a position manually for each request, they are just browsing normally and the server is serving up location-dependant advertisements, or maps, or something. I'm not sufficiently familiar with AJAX to see how this could be done without a user interaction. > > I'd also caution against using location as a means of selecting a language, I didn't mean it like that; I mentioned language purely as an example of current server-based negotiation. > If you really want to convey this information in a header, have you > considered using an X- header? That would work. As in X-xxxx: value, as opposed to registering a new formal header ? I didn't see it in 2616. -- Andrew Daviel, TRIUMF, Canada
Received on Wednesday, 5 December 2007 01:09:14 UTC