- From: 신정식, 申政湜 <jshin@chromium.org>
- Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2013 16:50:09 -0800
- To: "Jukka K. Korpela" <jkorpela@cs.tut.fi>
- Cc: WHATWG Proposals <whatwg@lists.whatwg.org>
2013/11/27 Jukka K. Korpela <jkorpela@cs.tut.fi> > 2013-11-28 0:20, Boris Zbarsky wrote: > > On 11/27/13 4:28 PM, Jungshik Shin (신정식, 申政湜) wrote: >> >>> That is, I suggest that 'navigator.language' always be the UI language >>> of a >>> web browser. >>> >> >> That's an unacceptable privacy leak from Mozilla's point of view. See >> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=55366 where we explicitly >> switched from that to basing navigator.language on the Accept header. >> > > More importantly, I would say, the browser’s UI language should normally > be completely irrelevant to page design and implementation. > > > I might be using an English-language browser because there is no better > option (localizations are lousy). This does not mean that when viewing a > page in, say, German, I would want the page to talk to me in English, to > use English-language month names in date controls and info, etc. > > Sure. I don't disagree with you. But, I have no idea what you wrote above has anything to do with what I wrote, i.e navigator.language (singular) containing the UI language and navigator.languages (plural) matching the Accept-Language HTTP header. Jungshik > Yucca > > >
Received on Friday, 13 December 2013 00:50:35 UTC