Collection of comments from WMLProgramming

Hey

Anyone with oodles of time to spare reading WMLProgramming will notice  
that it's been quite busy there recently.

I've taken a note of a few comments which have been raised on the list  
and seem worth a look to me. From past experience I suspect that these  
might have been dealt with already by the group, but in case they  
haven't... any thoughts?

1. Legal aspects of transcoding content have been mentioned many  
times. My view is that this sort of thing falls well outside the scope  
of a technical document, and that the legal position wrt IP rights etc  
will vary worldwide. However it has been pointed out that CTG  
participants may have access to legal resources which could cast a  
little light onto the issue, and this might be better than the total  
darkness it lurks within right now - even if such advice isn't  
suitable for inclusion into the doc. Any takers?

2. A robots.txt-like approach to transcoding has been suggested (back  
in March[1] and recently), with individual sites providing a means of  
signalling to a proxy that elements of their content should or should  
not be transcoded. Sounds like new technology to me, but has anyone  
considered this approach before?

3. Eduardo has suggested that the addition of the standard W3C string  
into the Via: field be made compulsory, such that any server might  
detect if its communication is passing via a transcoding proxy. It  
does seem possible within the current guidelines for a proxy to avoid  
adding this in, and to hide its identity behind a pseudonym - hiding  
the fact that a transcoder has potentially manipulated content from  
the origin server.

Thanks
Tom


[1] http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/wmlprogramming/message/27149
--
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, 1 November 2008 13:16:17 UTC