Re: [rtcweb] User Agent / Non-browser terminology
Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no> Tue, 11 November 2014 04:18 UTC
Return-Path: <harald@alvestrand.no>
X-Original-To: rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6B6431ACEDC for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 10 Nov 2014 20:18:01 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.493
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.493 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.594] autolearn=ham
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 r6tDlXC5_B48 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 10 Nov 2014 20:17:57 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mork.alvestrand.no (mork.alvestrand.no [158.38.152.117]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE6341ACE91 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Mon, 10 Nov 2014 20:17:56 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mork.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 77E0F7C0538; Tue, 11 Nov 2014 05:17:55 +0100 (CET)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at alvestrand.no
Received: from mork.alvestrand.no ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mork.alvestrand.no [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id kHDt-H3EVGay; Tue, 11 Nov 2014 05:17:50 +0100 (CET)
Received: from [30.59.35.90] (unknown [172.56.16.81]) by mork.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 6723F7C0536; Tue, 11 Nov 2014 05:17:49 +0100 (CET)
User-Agent: K-9 Mail for Android
In-Reply-To: <56C2F665D49E0341B9DF5938005ACDF819517AF2@DEMUMBX005.nsn-intra.net>
References: <56C2F665D49E0341B9DF5938005ACDF819517AF2@DEMUMBX005.nsn-intra.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----G4MI6ZN26I3860VL4U5A3WV9M6H0XZ"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
From: Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>
Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2014 18:17:36 -1000
To: "Rauschenbach, Uwe (NSN - DE/Munich)" <uwe.rauschenbach@nsn.com>, "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Message-ID: <7A0C5DCA-66CE-4E5C-A6E5-C6BD4ECFBC9D@alvestrand.no>
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtcweb/xzSDwM8XRHeYWAGwiulaC9u68ns
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] User Agent / Non-browser terminology
X-BeenThere: rtcweb@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Real-Time Communication in WEB-browsers working group list <rtcweb.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/rtcweb>, <mailto:rtcweb-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/rtcweb/>
List-Post: <mailto:rtcweb@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rtcweb-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb>, <mailto:rtcweb-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2014 04:18:01 -0000
Non-ua sounds even weirder... The reason for mentioning both UA and browser is that w3c tends to prefer UA. But we seem to be most comfortable with browser. Den 10. november 2014 17.09.56 GMT-10:00, skrev "Rauschenbach, Uwe (NSN - DE/Munich)" <uwe.rauschenbach@nsn.com>: >Hi Harald, > >The mic line is closed so I share this comment on the list. > >Doesn't it sound odd to have "WebRTC User Agent" vs. "WebRTC >non-browser"? >If we want to follow this path - shouldn't it then rather be "WebRTC >browser" vs. "WebRTC non-browser"? >Sounds more consistent to me. > >Kind regards, >Uwe -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
- [rtcweb] User Agent / Non-browser terminology Rauschenbach, Uwe (NSN - DE/Munich)
- Re: [rtcweb] User Agent / Non-browser terminology Harald Alvestrand