Re: [whatwg] Adding a property to navigator for getting device model

Hash: SHA1


I understand the focus is on the client-side, understandably, but
please note that on both client and server side "UA sniffing" is used
for 'responsive' design. On the server side for example it can be used
to route requests or format responses.

So, the server side information is definitely not a "side-effect"
"exploited" [?] for marketing and other purposes. What someone uses
the results of their traffic analyses for is separate from the fact
that traffic analyses is a vital tool. I disagree with the notion that
"UA sniffing" is some 'exploit' that is "not something we can really
avoid". It seems to me RFC 2616
[] is
pretty clear on that.

So, I repeat : "I would agree there is no immediate need for new or
extra structures; the vendors just applying the existing 'standards'
and not abusing the UA-string for 'marketing' purposes, would go a
long way."


> On Wed, Oct 1, 2014 at 7:43 PM, Jonas Sicking <>
> wrote:
>> On Wed, Oct 1, 2014 at 2:27 AM, Mounir Lamouri
>> <> wrote:
>>> On Wed, 1 Oct 2014, at 15:01, Jonas Sicking wrote:
>>>> On Tue, Sep 30, 2014 at 4:40 AM, Mounir Lamouri
>>>> <> wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, 24 Sep 2014, at 11:54, Jonas Sicking wrote:
>>>>>> Thoughts?
>>>>> Do you have any data that makes you think that those
>>>>> websites would stop using UA sniffing but start using
>>>>> navigator.deviceModel if they had that property available?
>>>> I know that the Cordova module for exposing this information
>>>> is one of the most popular Cordova modules, so that's a
>>>> pretty good indication. But I don't have data directly from
>>>> websites.
>>> When you were pointing that websites currently do UA sniffing
>>> is it on the client side of the server side?
>> I'd imagine UA sniffing happens more often on the server side,
>> though I suspect it varies with the reason why people do it.
>> But the Cordova API is client side, so there's definitely desire
>> to have it there too.
> I was under the impression that we are mostly talking client-side
> so that JavaScript can adapt the choice of features to what is
> available in the browser. Server-side information is merely a side
> effect (which, of course, is exploited for marketing and other
> purposes, but not something we can really avoid).
> Silvia.

Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (MingW32)


Received on Wednesday, 1 October 2014 10:27:46 UTC