Re: ACTION-981: user preferences

Two comments inline.

Eduardo Casais wrote:
> ACTION-981
[...]
> EDITORIAL CLARIFICATION TO 4.1.5.3
> 
> In section 4.1.5.3, retructure the paragraphs as indicated below. This establishes
> the fact that, in the absence of any explicitly stated user preference, the server
> preferred representation is to be delivered to the terminal. The user can then 
> restate the preference as "restructure", but in any case:
> a) if there is an alternate representation, he must be given the choice to access it;
> b) he must be given the choice to access the original content anyway (from 4.2.9.1).
> 
> --------
> Proxies must assume that by default users wish to receive a representation 
> prepared by the Web site. 
> 
> Proxies may offer users an option to override this default and choose to view a
> restructured experience even when a Web site offers a choice of user experience.
> If a user has made such a choice, then proxies may alter header field values when
> requesting resources in order to reflect that choice, but must, on receipt of an
> indication from a Web site that it offers alternative representations (see G.1.4.2
> Indication of Intended Presentation Media Type of Representation), inform the user
> of this fact and allow him to select an alternative representation. 
> 
> Proxies must assess whether a user's expressed preference for a restructured
> representation is still valid if a Web site changes its choice of representations
> (see 4.2.6 Receipt of Vary HTTP Header Field).
> --------
> 
> 
> EDITORIAL CLARIFICATION TO 4.2.2
> 
> The adjustments to the text serves to make clear that individual inhibitions of 
> transformations apply whenever the default is set to "transform":
> 
> --------
> Proxies must provide a means for users to express preferences for inhibiting content
> transformation whenever this is has been set as the default behaviour by the user.

I don't understand the "whenever" clause here. The goal is to allow 
users to prevent content transformation on a given Web site, and not 
only to revert a choice they may have made in the past. Exception 
clauses of 4.1.5 still apply AFAICT, so modification of HTTP Header 
fields may still be performed without users having expressed an explicit 
preference.

I'm fine with the proposed text otherwise.


> In this case, those inhibition preferences must be maintained on Web site by Web site
> basis for each user. In the event of a transformed response, the behaviour in 4.2.9.1
> applies anyway.
> 
> Proxies must solicit re-expression of preferences with respect to of a server if the
> server starts indicating that it offers varying responses as discussed under 4.2.6
> Receipt of Vary HTTP Header Field.
> --------
> 
> 
> ALTERNATIVE TO EDITORIAL CLARIFICATIONS TO 4.1.5.3 AND 4.2.2
> 
> We keep the first sentence in 4.1.5.3 as follows:
> 
> --------
> Proxies should assume that by default users wish to receive a representation 
> prepared by the Web site. 
> --------
> 
> And add the following sentence at the end of the first paragraph in 4.2.2:
> 
> --------
> If the default proxy behaviour, in the absence of any explicit user preference, is
> to transform content, then the user must have an additional option to specify a
> blanket inhibition of content transformation for all sites.
> --------
> 
> The first variant is actually simpler and more consistent with the original intent,
> hence preferable.
> 
> 
> EDITORIAL CLARIFICATION TO 4.2.3
> 
> The second paragraph only mentions a single option -- akin to the infamous dialog
> box "serious error, please click ok to continue", leaving no choice but to crash the
> system.
> 
> There must be another option, i.e. the possibility to abort the transaction.

What does "abort the transaction" mean? I suspect different 
implementations will add different options, depending on the context. 
Why make this particular option mandatory? (In other words, the 
guidelines mandate the "please click ok to continue", but do not prevent 
the addition of other buttons!)


> 
> ----------
> If a proxy determines that a resource as currently represented is likely to cause
> serious misoperation of the user agent, then it may advise the user that this is
> the case and must provide an option for the user to continue with unaltered
> content, and another one to abort the transaction.
> ----------
> 
> A possibility to continue with an altered response would be inconsistent with the
> first paragraph of 4.2.3, as well as sections 4.2.9.3, G.1.3, G.1.4.2, and would
> hollow out the meaningfulness of no-transform directives.
> 
> 
> E.Casais
> 
> 
>       
> 
>

Received on Monday, 22 June 2009 13:56:55 UTC