W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > May 2009

RE: HTML interpreter vs. HTML user agent

From: Larry Masinter <masinter@adobe.com>
Date: Sat, 30 May 2009 01:19:42 -0700
To: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
CC: "Roy T. Fielding" <fielding@gbiv.com>, HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>
Message-ID: <8B62A039C620904E92F1233570534C9B0118CD95EC38@nambx04.corp.adobe.com>
Re: use of "user agent" through W3C specifications.
> http://www.w3.org/2003/glossary/keyword/All/?keywords=user+agent

Can we agree to use WebArch's definition for terminology?


user agent   One type of Web agent; a piece of software acting 
             on  behalf of a person.

web agent    A person or a piece of software acting on the 
             information space on behalf of a person, entity,
             or process."

There is one use of "interpreter", in VoiceXML

but I don't think they intended it as an insult or to
imply anything about interpreter vs. compiler.

If the HTML document needs more terms than are defined in
WebArch, I would accept an action item to get the TAG
to update the WebArch terminology section.

I'm going to work to resolve the terminology differences
with the HTTP document in IETF (of which I am listed
as an editor).

It seems important that HTML share terminology with other
and future W3C documents, especially around important topics
as the scope of applicability of documents.

(Note that draft-abarth-mime-sniffing in IETF uses and
seems to scope the applicability of the I-D to "browsers".
While "browser" is not defined in WebArch, it is defined
in several other documents.

Received on Saturday, 30 May 2009 08:20:31 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Saturday, 9 October 2021 18:44:47 UTC