- From: Nigel Choi <nigel@admob.com>
- Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2007 11:37:58 -0800
- To: public-bpwg-ct@w3.org
As a content provider, I take issue with this sentence in section 2.3.1 and 2.5.1: "As an exception to the previous requirement, a CT proxy should deny CP directives that would result in dangerous markup being sent to the browser." How does that work in relation to Cache-Control: no-transform ? Does the Cache-Control: no-transform take precedence, i.e. the proxy sends the markup unaltered IN ANY CASE back to the browser, or does the above requirement take precedence? It will be problematic if it is the latter. I understand this requirement is noble, and we have all seen what bad markup will do to mobile browsers. However, this may be a difficult requirement to fulfill in practice. The problem is in the definition of "dangerous markup." This assumes the content transformation proxy knows better than the content owner what is "dangerous" for the phone. What if it is wrong? What if the content owner sends the markup for a reason? What do you mean by "dangerous?" Without a clear definition of "dangerous markup" one can go down the slippery slope of banning content that the proxy operator deems "dangerous." I propose that this sentence be removed from the requirement entirely. Thanks, Nigel.
Received on Sunday, 9 December 2007 19:38:26 UTC