W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-qa-dev@w3.org > February 2009

Re: linkchecker's Makefile.PL and CPAN trick

From: Ville Skyttä <ville.skytta@iki.fi>
Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2009 19:59:02 +0200
To: olivier Thereaux <ot@w3.org>
Cc: public-qa-dev@w3.org
Message-Id: <200902041959.03514.ville.skytta@iki.fi>

On Monday 02 February 2009, olivier Thereaux wrote:
> Hi Ville,
> On 31-Jan-09, at 10:56 AM, Ville Skyttä wrote:
> > The only thing I'm a bit uncertain of is whether application/
> > vnd.wap.xhtml+xml
> > should be kept in the Accept header.  Even though it currently in
> > the CVS
> > version has a q value of 0.6 (lower than everything except */*),
> > some large
> > sites such as Google and Yahoo now decide to serve mobile versions
> > of their
> > sites to the link checker.
> This is certainly part of a disturbing trend that many sites show,
> obviously misimplementing content negotiation. In this case I share
> your uncertainty, but would be tempted to:
> 1) keep the link checker as it is now. I somewhat hope that sites
> doing that kind of on-the-fly content adaptation will have the same
> URI mapping for "web" and "mobile"
> 1) send a quick mail to the big sites identified
> 2) write about the issue on a W3C blog, try to put it in a way that is
> not accusatory but wonder what are the causes of this implementation
> (bad mobile User-Agents issuing bogus Accept strings?) and what can be
> made to keep negotiation relevant.

Works for me.  If nobody yells by then, I'll wrap up the 4.4 release tomorrow 
evening (Europe/Helsinki) as it is now in CVS and upload it to CPAN.
Received on Wednesday, 4 February 2009 17:59:37 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:54:55 UTC