Re: p2: Accept-Language missing, empty or no match

Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> Tue, 30 April 2013 03:23 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DCC1D21F9C3C for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 29 Apr 2013 20:23:12 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.106
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.106 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.493, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 0hqqIHC0VJFp for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 29 Apr 2013 20:23:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.56]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 043DE21F9C37 for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Mon, 29 Apr 2013 20:23:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1UX19a-0004eS-TH for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Tue, 30 Apr 2013 03:22:54 +0000
Resent-Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2013 03:22:54 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1UX19a-0004eS-TH@frink.w3.org>
Received: from lisa.w3.org ([128.30.52.41]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <mnot@mnot.net>) id 1UX19R-0004cv-87 for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Tue, 30 Apr 2013 03:22:45 +0000
Received: from mxout-08.mxes.net ([216.86.168.183]) by lisa.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <mnot@mnot.net>) id 1UX19Q-0004Yk-K1 for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Tue, 30 Apr 2013 03:22:45 +0000
Received: from mnot-mini.mnot.net (unknown [118.209.190.66]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.mxes.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4E1E2509B6 for <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>; Mon, 29 Apr 2013 23:22:23 -0400 (EDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.3 \(1503\))
From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
In-Reply-To: <8741FE69-C013-4853-A9A3-6321A18E56EA@mnot.net>
Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2013 13:22:20 +1000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <2896D8B9-399D-4F68-9BC1-9EFDB893C2BE@mnot.net>
References: <8741FE69-C013-4853-A9A3-6321A18E56EA@mnot.net>
To: "ietf-http-wg@w3.org Group" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1503)
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=216.86.168.183; envelope-from=mnot@mnot.net; helo=mxout-08.mxes.net
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.3
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: AWL=-2.369, BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: lisa.w3.org 1UX19Q-0004Yk-K1 c76bb7eceda6beabba9ff232f0c84e90
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: p2: Accept-Language missing, empty or no match
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/2896D8B9-399D-4F68-9BC1-9EFDB893C2BE@mnot.net>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/17709
X-Loop: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Resent-Sender: ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org
Precedence: list
List-Id: <ietf-http-wg.w3.org>
List-Help: <http://www.w3.org/Mail/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Anyone disagree with adding similar text to Accept-Language? If not, I'll mark for incorporation.


On 20/04/2013, at 6:49 PM, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> wrote:

> In p2, Accept, Accept-Charset and Accept-Encoding all have language similar to this:
> 
>> A request without any Accept header field implies that the user agent will accept any media type in response. If an Accept header field is present in a request and none of the available representations for the response have a media type that is listed as acceptable, the origin server may either honor the Accept header field by sending a 406 (Not Acceptable) response or disregard the Accept header field by treating the response as if it is not subject to content negotiation.
> 
> However, Accept-Language in 5.3.5 does not. Is this intentional?
> 
> 
> --
> Mark Nottingham   http://www.mnot.net/
> 
> 
> 
> 

--
Mark Nottingham   http://www.mnot.net/