Re: Is “fr, en; q=0.3” a valid Accept-Language value?

[Samuel Williams <[e-mail]>]

Thanks Amos, yes, that's exactly how it works in the code. But thanks
for clarifying it.

The reason why I used the word computed is because it's not a direct
1-1 association. If you want to find the q value for image/jpeg, you
need to first see, is there image/jpeg? no. Is there image/*? no. Is
there */*? Yes. To me, this is a computation, not simply an
association.

On 31 October 2016 at 14:29, Amos Jeffries <[e-mail]> wrote:
> On 31/10/2016 12:15 a.m., Samuel Williams wrote:
>> Thanks Julian, yes I wondered if that was how it was being explained.
>> It might be the wording of the sentence preceding the table:
>>
>>> would cause the following values to be associated:
>>
>> It might be clearer if it were "could be used to compute the following
>> quality values:"
>>
>
> It is not computing quality values. The q values are provided by the
> client. It is simply associating those q= values with the possible
> response types.
>
> Like so:
> 1) take the request Accept list
> 2a) sort by q= value
> 2b) drop explicit types that cannot be produced (ie xml/tar)
> 3) output the response for type at the front of the list
>
>
> If you are writing a client to produce Accept lists, then you should do
> the sorting step when generating the request so as to get faster
> responses from the server.
>
> Amos
>
>