Warning:
This wiki has been archived and is now read-only.
ContentNegotiationNorms
New content negotiation norms
Problem statement / use cases
- when authors provide alternate language content through HTTP content negotiation, users may want to provide input into the selection process for the best alternative.
For example, a user whose native language is English but has some knowledge of French and even less knowledge of Arabic, may navigate to a site that provides alternate resources in English, French and Arabic. However, knowing the site’s primary language is Arabic, the user prefers to struggle through the Arabic representation of the resource expecting it may be the most up to date.
Alternatively, the user may navigate to the site and select English as the preferred representation for this site and this session. After browsing the site for some time, the user may decide that the Arabic representation would be better and more current.
Proposed solutions
Require interactive UAs that handle language negotiated content to solicit feedback from users either interactively or through previously established user defaults. [ Also require interactive UAs provide users with a means to switch language resources representations after navigating to a site.
Discussion and evaluation
WG members should post feedback and other discussion to the WG’s list serve (the URI for the links below provides date information). Search on this email subject.
- initial message (Robert Burns)
- clarifying questions (Shawn Medero)
- concern that RFC 2295 is insufficiently implemented on the server side (Thomas Broyer)
See also