- From: Frank Ellermann <nobody@xyzzy.claranet.de>
- Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2008 22:43:04 +0200
- To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Julian Reschk wrote: [...] >> Felix Sasaki wrote: >>> ... >>> RFC 4647 defines a basic language range in sec. 2.1 [...] > Proposed text: [...] Fine. > Each language-range MAY be given an associated quality value which > represents an estimate of the user's preference for the languages Optionally s/MAY/can/. The syntax has it clear that "q=" <qvalue> can be omitted. Do you have a special reason to write "q" "=" instead of "q=" ? Is this a place where you actually want some kind of *WSP "=" *WSP ? > would mean: "I prefer Danish, but will accept British English and > other types of English." Maybe note that this list is not supposed to be sorted by <qvalue>s. > The special range "*", if present in the Accept-Language field, > matches every tag not matched by any other range present in the > Accept-Language field. Better add an example here, where the <qvalue> of "*" is not the smalles in the list. That is a pathological case, you'd get get an "anything is better than something" effect: Accept-Language: da, en-gb;q=0.8, en;q=0.7, *;q=0.75 What does this mean if only "en" and "es" content is available ? > I also note that "Basic Filtering" is case-insensitive, which it > wasn't in RFC2616. [RFC 2616 page 29] | all tags are case-insensitive Nothing new here, IMO. Frank
Received on Friday, 1 August 2008 20:42:47 UTC