- From: Olivier Thereaux <ot@w3.org>
- Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2008 20:17:59 -0400
- To: Etienne Miret <etienne.miret@ens-lyon.fr>
- Cc: www-validator@w3.org
Bonjour Etienne, Thanks a lot for your ideas, and patches too! Your work is much appreciated. As I said in my other mail today, sorry for not having replied earlier, I'd actually looked at the patches but I believe a flu and computer woes made me lose my focus on those. I guess it shows that it is safer to submit patches to the bugzilla in addition or instead of the list only - they don't get drowned in discussion and get addressed or at least looked at sooner or later. http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public On Fri, Mar 28, 2008, Etienne Miret wrote: > <http://perso.ens-lyon.fr/etienne.miret/2008/03/28/negotiate-referer.diff> > It makes use of the already available "accept", "accept-language" and > "accept-charset" parameters and populate them with the values provided > by the client *in case of a referer request*. It will also make sure > those values are kept across revalidation. This makes URI to be very > long. Sorry. I think this would be a welcome patch, as indeed it makes sense to forward accept and accept-language in case of referer validation (not sure, however about accept-encoding). The small issue about this patch is that it seems to also include additions to the UI, additional options that not only would clutter the interface, they also seem to duplicate existing options (e.g why http_accept and accept?) Do you think you could make a reduced patch that would only set accept and accept-language in the case of referer validation? > The second patch is: > <http://perso.ens-lyon.fr/etienne.miret/2008/03/28/negotiate-all.diff> > This one brings full content-negotiation support to the validator, > providing options for setting the Accept, Accept-Language and > Accept-Charset headers on the home page (and on validation results if > verbose output is selected). However, it wont send any Accept* headers > by default. Ditto above, I don't know if additional UI options for such a rare case is a good idea, and I think that the validator already has the feature with the accept and accept-language parameters: http://validator.w3.org/docs/users.html#Output Thank you -- olivier
Received on Monday, 21 April 2008 00:18:30 UTC