Re: Http header including if ECMA (Javascript) is on and the version

Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> Mon, 17 October 2016 03:11 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf-http-wg-request+bounce-httpbisa-archive-bis2juki=lists.ie@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 57A7F12955A for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 16 Oct 2016 20:11:07 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.332
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.332 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.431, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id AlC-akYxbGLd for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 16 Oct 2016 20:11:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.56]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 757DC12955C for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Sun, 16 Oct 2016 20:11:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1bvyG4-00007K-6e for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Mon, 17 Oct 2016 03:06:36 +0000
Resent-Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2016 03:06:36 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1bvyG4-00007K-6e@frink.w3.org>
Received: from maggie.w3.org ([128.30.52.39]) by frink.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <mnot@mnot.net>) id 1bvyFy-00006c-89 for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Mon, 17 Oct 2016 03:06:30 +0000
Received: from mxout-07.mxes.net ([216.86.168.182]) by maggie.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA256:256) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <mnot@mnot.net>) id 1bvyFv-00089k-O2 for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Mon, 17 Oct 2016 03:06:29 +0000
Received: from [192.168.3.104] (unknown [124.189.98.244]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.mxes.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 2D14E22E255; Sun, 16 Oct 2016 23:06:02 -0400 (EDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.0 \(3226\))
From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
In-Reply-To: <CANEdHmj1vfroxFD7_OU9WH+OZ07TF+m0Sdk3N5QfT57VtjLoog@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2016 14:05:59 +1100
Cc: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <DE958BCD-8F07-4E30-9A57-F1D14DDB3439@mnot.net>
References: <CANEdHmiCifF_s5ZGJnav=4y72KND-wxB1F7f9g8q9NYNgzOK3g@mail.gmail.com> <CANEdHmj1vfroxFD7_OU9WH+OZ07TF+m0Sdk3N5QfT57VtjLoog@mail.gmail.com>
To: Scott Morgan <scott@adligo.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3226)
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=216.86.168.182; envelope-from=mnot@mnot.net; helo=mxout-07.mxes.net
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.3
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: AWL=1.351, BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, W3C_AA=-1, W3C_DB=-1, W3C_IRA=-1, W3C_IRR=-3, W3C_WL=-1
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: maggie.w3.org 1bvyFv-00089k-O2 d0f6a85348925fba36adb006f159eb2e
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: Http header including if ECMA (Javascript) is on and the version
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/DE958BCD-8F07-4E30-9A57-F1D14DDB3439@mnot.net>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/32609
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>

Hi Scott,

My sense is that there isn't substantial interest in taking this into this draft, especially at this late stage (it's almost out of Working Group Last Call). 

What we really need to see is some amount of enthusiasm for adding the header by implementers; due to its nature, the most obvious people to be talking to will be browser vendors.

You might have better luck getting the attention of the appropriate people here:
  https://discourse.wicg.io
(this is effectively a discussion forum for new browser features)

That's not to say that this WG wouldn't standardise it if there was demonstrated implementer interest, of course.

Cheers,


> On 16 Oct. 2016, at 4:26 am, Scott Morgan <scott@adligo.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi All,
> 
>   I have encountered a issue with web design that appears to be part of the http specification.
> I believe that the version of ECMA (Javascript) and if it is on or off should be included with the http request header when sent to a server.  It might fit well into this RFC;
> 
>   https://www.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-httpbis-client-hints-02.txt
> 
>   Perhaps a new section between 7 & 8 as follows;
> 
> 8.  The ECMA script (Javascript) Client Hint
> 
>    The "ECMA" request header field is a number or text that 
>    indicates the client's current ECMA implementation version.  A blank ECMA
>    hint would indicate that ECMA script is currently turned off.
>      
>      ECMA = Text [32 ASCII characters]
> 
>    If ECMA occurs in a message more than once, the last value
>    should be used to override other occurrences.
>    Examples;
>  
>      #1 ECMA script is turned off
>      ECMA:
> 
>      #2 ECMA script is on the Next version
>      ECMA: Next
> 
>      #3 ECMA script is on version 5.1
>      ECMA: 5.1
> 
> 
>   The basic thing that I am trying to do is determine if Javascript can be used to assemble a html page or if it should be done server side if Javascript is turned off.  Currently I can do this by assuming javascript is on and then redirecting from the browser when it is off using something like;
>  <noscript><meta http-equiv="refresh" content="0; url=/tt/session.html"></noscript>
> 
> When javascript is on I can assemble (and cache most of the repeated parts of the page).
>  i.e. profile these pages in Chrome and check the speed and cacheing;
> http://mokshayoga.com/tt/tuition.html
> then
> http://mokshayoga.com/tt/index.html
> 
> Vs.
> https://www.mokshayoga.com/chicago-yoga-policies.html
> then
> https://www.mokshayoga.com/chicago-yoga-events.html
> 
> Cheers,
> -- 
> Scott Morgan
> President & CEO
> Adligo Inc
> http://www.adligo.com
> 1-866-968-1893 Ex 101
> scott@adligo.com
> By Appointment Only: skype:adligo1?call
> https://www.linkedin.com/in/scott-morgan-21739415
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Scott Morgan
> President & CEO
> Adligo Inc
> http://www.adligo.com
> 1-866-968-1893 Ex 101
> scott@adligo.com
> By Appointment Only: skype:adligo1?call
> https://www.linkedin.com/in/scott-morgan-21739415
> 
> 

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