- From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- Date: Wed, 3 Jun 2009 17:48:58 +1000
- To: Daniel Stenberg <daniel@haxx.se>
- Cc: "Roy T. Fielding" <fielding@gbiv.com>, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>, Larry Masinter <masinter@adobe.com>
I'd agree the chosen terminology isn't great. Not sure that changing it wouldn't cause more proplems than it solves. On 02/06/2009, at 5:16 PM, Daniel Stenberg wrote: > On Tue, 2 Jun 2009, Mark Nottingham wrote: > >> To me, the biggest difference is that a UA is the end node; i.e., >> it is the 'origin client' to compliment the 'origin server.' A >> proxy is a client, not a user-agent. > > Ah yes. That's a very good point, but isn't it a bit too subtle to > name an end-point "UA" while an end-point or proxy is called > "client" ? > > I mean, if the distinction in the docs need to separate an end-point > from a proxy, won't for example those (more explicit) terms be > better to use then? > > -- > > / daniel.haxx.se > -- Mark Nottingham http://www.mnot.net/
Received on Wednesday, 3 June 2009 07:49:37 UTC