Re: #428 Accept-Language ordering for identical qvalues

Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> Tue, 22 January 2013 13:55 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 CF1D121F8984 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 22 Jan 2013 05:55:25 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id qknGwKr16moX for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 22 Jan 2013 05:55:25 -0800 (PST)
Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.56]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2CC8E21F8951 for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Tue, 22 Jan 2013 05:55:25 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1TxeIp-0004TM-5I for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Tue, 22 Jan 2013 13:54:15 +0000
Resent-Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2013 13:54:15 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1TxeIp-0004TM-5I@frink.w3.org>
Received: from lisa.w3.org ([128.30.52.41]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <julian.reschke@gmx.de>) id 1TxeIk-0004Sd-Qg for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Tue, 22 Jan 2013 13:54:10 +0000
Received: from mout.gmx.net ([212.227.17.20]) by lisa.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <julian.reschke@gmx.de>) id 1TxeIj-0007Jn-QB for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Tue, 22 Jan 2013 13:54:10 +0000
Received: from mailout-de.gmx.net ([10.1.76.2]) by mrigmx.server.lan (mrigmx001) with ESMTP (Nemesis) id 0Mh7vz-1TbyY22fVx-00MJmy for <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>; Tue, 22 Jan 2013 14:53:43 +0100
Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 22 Jan 2013 13:53:43 -0000
Received: from mail.greenbytes.de (EHLO [192.168.1.102]) [217.91.35.233] by mail.gmx.net (mp002) with SMTP; 22 Jan 2013 14:53:43 +0100
X-Authenticated: #1915285
X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX1/XMWxvMpzXiXzplInfYPe1zUN7xM5MHbzRgb52R4 sBOZFH4B2asvy6
Message-ID: <50FE99E3.3020009@gmx.de>
Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2013 14:53:39 +0100
From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130107 Thunderbird/17.0.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Nicholas Shanks <nickshanks@nickshanks.com>
CC: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
References: <50F6CD98.8080802@gmx.de> <2BF19800-66E0-42DC-B0B5-0F8CA6AE6379@gbiv.com> <50F7C0DC.90906@gmx.de> <CA+hEJVW1AkVCZdivu8tM1m2E_hsXH0BSrQwM=4A87xx5zrBDBw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CA+hEJVW1AkVCZdivu8tM1m2E_hsXH0BSrQwM=4A87xx5zrBDBw@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=212.227.17.20; envelope-from=julian.reschke@gmx.de; helo=mout.gmx.net
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.5
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: AWL=-3.450, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: lisa.w3.org 1TxeIj-0007Jn-QB 1c91b32962b6de357131731ab6513a20
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: #428 Accept-Language ordering for identical qvalues
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/50FE99E3.3020009@gmx.de>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/16109
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>

On 2013-01-22 14:40, Nicholas Shanks wrote:
> On 17 January 2013 09:14, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> wrote:
>> On 2013-01-17 09:59, Roy T. Fielding wrote:
>>> than there are servers that implement language negotiation and
>>> actually want to resolve ties at random.
>>
>> They do not "want" to resolve at random; they do so because they have
>> implemented what the spec says. There's no reason to create an ordered list
>> structure when the spec says that an unordered list is sufficient.
>
> I think no implication of randomness should be permitted by the specifications.
> They should instead require that a deterministic process be used, and
> that, other than requests to services which explicitly exist to
> provide random results (e.g. Wikipedia's "Random Page" link), the same
> request should generate the same result providing nothing pertinent to
> the resource has changed on the server.
>
> Someone, I don't recall who, gave the example of a home page loading
> blog posts via AJAX, where the blog posts are available in two
> languages. Random selection between the variants, where (q * qs)
> values are equal for both languages, or are being ignored, would

Can you please give an example of clients sending these kind of header 
field values?

Clients that care can provide different qvalues, and as a matter of 
fact, they do.

 > ...

Best regards, Julian