- From: Foteos Macrides <MACRIDES@sci.wfbr.edu>
- Date: Wed, 22 May 1996 20:24:40 -0500 (EST)
- To: connolly@beach.w3.org
- Cc: www-html@w3.org
"Daniel W. Connolly" <connolly@beach.w3.org> wrote: >In message <01I4Z75LICG200FLFS@SCI.WFBR.EDU>, Foteos Macrides writes: >> >> Unfortunately, content negotiation was not included in the >>HTTP/1.1 ID > >What? > >Please cite sources! It helps prevent the spread of such >misinformation: > >http://www.w3.org/pub/WWW/Protocols/HTTP/1.1/draft-ietf-http-v11-spec-03 > >15 Content Negotiation >A generic resource has multiple entities associated with it, all of >which are representations of the content of the resource. Content >negotiation is the process of selecting the best representation when a >GET or HEAD request is made on the generic resource. HTTP/1.1 has >provisions for two kinds of content negotiation: opaque negotiation and >transparent negotiation. Sorry, too terse sentences that are misinformation out of context, and misinterpretable even in context. Here's another try. In response to Brian's assertion that HTML markup for MATH is unnecessary, because math is better handled via content negotiation, and that: Brian Behlendorf <brian@organic.com> wrote: >[...] If it's a text-only browser, the author could generate (to >their liking/quality control) a text equivalent. Of course, with Lynx >2.5 claiming to "Accept:" a bunch of image formats this is something of a >problem. [...] I meant to reply that unfortunately -- for that set of assertions in Brian's massage -- the May 2, 1996 HTTP/1.1 ID (reference above from Dan) expresses intent for support of both opaque and transparent negotiation, and their combination, but defers description of the transparent negotiation algorithm and their combination to as yet unavailable drafts (can't finish everything at once 8-). Also, in it's descriptions of Accept headers for opaque negotiation, it indicates the traditional q=qvalue parameter for all content types, and level=number for text/html, but does not reference or appear to incorporate the wonderful proposals in the February 22, 1996 "Holtman" ID: "Proposed Content Negotiation Definitions for HTTP/1.1", K. Holtman ftp://ietf.cnri.reston.va.us/internet-drafts/ draft-holtman-http-negotiation-00.txt most valuable of which, for a client like Lynx, is mxb=maxbytes Although normally Lynx would not send Accept headers specifying image and other binary content-types, it can be run in a window, with the DISPLAY variable set, and in such cases on processing its configuration files and the mailcap file it is likely to have helper apps for such objects set up, and will send additional Accept headers accordingly. It also can be configured to include a number of parameters, e.g. (using the simple, serial Accept header format): Accept: text/html Accept: text/plain;q=0.9 Accept: image/jpeg;q=0.9;mxb=1000000 Accept: image/gif;q=0.8;mxb=1000000 [...] Accept: */*;q=0.001 but users would be ill-advised to assume that many, if any, currently deployed servers will handle that fully as intended. It would be highly desireable for a client such as Lynx if what Brian claimed is possible via content negotiation became a useful reality. I therefor wondered if he had modified his server to make it truly possible, and if so, perhaps it could be tried with the current Lynx developers' code to see if it really works well, or what might be done to get it really working well. ( I realize it's likely that even if we did succeed in getting it really working usefully, and sites with special needs, like getting math displayed decently by both GUI and text clients, made use of that ability, if the major vendors didn't follow that lead and/or the great majority of sites did not bother to generate text equivalents, their useage statistics would "prove" that we don't exist and didn't deploy, but the illusion that we exist and succeeded would still be rewarding. :) Fote ========================================================================= Foteos Macrides Worcester Foundation for Biomedical Research MACRIDES@SCI.WFBR.EDU 222 Maple Avenue, Shrewsbury, MA 01545 =========================================================================
Received on Wednesday, 22 May 1996 20:24:45 UTC