- From: Tom Hume <Tom.Hume@futureplatforms.com>
- Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2008 16:29:19 +0000
- To: Luca Passani <passani@eunet.no>
- Cc: wmlprogramming@yahoogroups.com, Francois Daoust <fd@w3.org>, public-bpwg-ct <public-bpwg-ct@w3.org>
On 19 Dec 2008, at 18:50, Luca Passani wrote: >> We resolved to add an explicit text in this section that states >> that inferring that a desktop User-Agent is needed in the absence >> of any indication (e.g. URI patterns) is contrary to the guidelines. > Francois, Can I find the text you are referring to somewhere? It's a resolution referred to at the top of the minutes here: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-bpwg-ct/2008Nov/0079.html "Add some text in 4.1.5 to state that inferring that a desktop User- Agent is needed in the absence of any indication (e.g. URI patterns) is contrary to the guidelines" > anyway, my interpretation of your sentence is that, in case of a URI > of the form "www.*" it is OK to spoof the UA string. Do I understand > correctly? I suggest you re-read section 4.1.5 of the CT document: http://www.w3.org/TR/ct-guidelines/#sec-altering-header-values This section of the document makes it clear that HTTP headers are not to be altered other than in specific circumstances, and would prohibit transcoders from changing user-agents in situations where URLs don't match patterns judged to be mobile-specific... which is the behaviour Verizon/Novarra were suggesting is OK. The reaction from the CT group has been to specifically add a section saying "no, this isn't OK". Bearing in mind your new rule that "engaging in long discussion is only acceptable when done in good faith with an open mind and respect for other people's viewpoints." I'm not sure we can usefully discuss this particular point much further. Tom -- Future Platforms Ltd e: Tom.Hume@futureplatforms.com t: +44 (0) 1273 819038 m: +44 (0) 7971 781422 company: www.futureplatforms.com personal: tomhume.org
Received on Saturday, 20 December 2008 16:29:57 UTC