- From: Karl Dubost <karl@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2006 10:09:28 +0900
- To: Hugh Winkler <hughw@wellstorm.com>
- Cc: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>, W3C TAG <www-tag@w3.org>, Olivier Théreaux <ot@w3.org>
Le 17 août 06 à 04:09, Hugh Winkler a écrit :
> Many server vendors have not provided adequate support for authors to
> generate the correct Content-type headers. They did not understand the
> authoritative aspect of content-type by reading RFC 2616 and
> predecessors. Put a different way, they placed a different semantic on
> Content-type. So there are content-type headers being served up out
> there, some adhering to one, authoritative semantic, and others
> adherign to a less authoritative, more "hinty" one. Wrongly, we think,
> but there you are.
[[[
II. Allow the content manager to use and configure character encoding
negotiation
Content-managers should be provided with an easy way to specify that
several documents are different instances of the same resource with
different character encoding.
Server should then apply server-driven negotiation algorithms to
serve the most appropriate variant based at least on the requested
Accept-Charset ([RFC2616] section 14.2) header.
]]]
-- Common HTTP Implementation Problems
http://www.w3.org/TR/chips/#cp7.1
Fri, 24 Jan 2003 15:21:02 GMT
It requests maybe a W3C Note to coordinate a technical solution between
* authoring tools
* servers
* browsers (user agents)
Which would *help* to solve the problem. On the road for better content.
--
Karl Dubost - http://www.w3.org/People/karl/
W3C Conformance Manager, QA Activity Lead
QA Weblog - http://www.w3.org/QA/
*** Be Strict To Be Cool ***
Received on Thursday, 17 August 2006 01:09:38 UTC