|
| |
| | HTTP/1.1: Content Negotiation |
 | | Agent-driven negotiation is advantageous when the response would vary over commonly-used dimensions (such as type, language, or encoding), when the origin server is unable to determine a user agent's capabilities from examining the request, and generally when public caches are used to distribute server load and reduce network usage. | | | With agent-driven negotiation, selection of the best representation for a response is performed by the user agent after receiving an initial response from the origin server. | | | See section 13.6 for use of the Vary header field by caches and section 14.44 for use of the Vary header field by servers. |
|
http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rfc2616-sec12.html
|
|
| |
| | RFC 2295 (rfc2295) |
| | The rules for when a content encoding may be applied are the same as in HTTP/1.1: servers MAY content-encode responses that are the result of transparent content negotiation whenever an Accept-Encoding header in the request allows it. | | | Holtman & Mutz Experimental [Page 26] RFC 2295 Transparent Content Negotiation March 1998 Absence of the Accept-Features header in a request is equivalent to the inclusion of Accept-Features: * By using the Accept-Features header, a remote variant selection algorithm can sometimes determine the truth value of a feature predicate on behalf of the user agent. | | | For example, in content negotiation on web pages, a "textonly" tag would identify a capability of a text-only user agent, but the user of a graphical user agent may use this tag to specify that text-only content is preferred over graphical content. |
|
http://www.cse.ohio-state.edu/cgi-bin/rfc/rfc2295.html
|
|
| |
| | Apache Content Negotiation |
| | Apache 1.3.4 also supports 'transparent' content negotiation, which is an experimental negotiation protocol defined in RFC 2295 and RFC 2296. | | | This negotiation method gives the browser full control over deciding on the 'best' variant, the result is therefore dependent on the specific algorithms used by the browser. | | | But, if the resource is negotiable at the server, this might result in only the first requested variant being cached and subsequent cache hits might return the wrong response. |
|
http://owl.smeal.psu.edu/manual/content-negotiation.html
|
|
| |
| | Apache Week. Content Negotiation |
| | Content Negotiation is an often over-looked feature of Apache, but correctly used it can let you present documents in different languages and formats based on what the user wants. | | | Content negotiation is a very powerful tool where the browser says what type of information it can accept, and the server decides what (if any) type of information to return. | | | Instead of using a var file, file extensions can be used to identify the content of files. |
|
http://www.apacheweek.com/features/negotiation
|
|
| |
| | Content Negotiation |
| | The canonical example of why I might want to use content negotiation goes something like this: suppose I have an SVG diagram that I want to publish. | | | On the one hand, content negotiation offers a transparent solution to a tricky problem. | | | Your browser sends a list of content types that it understands and the server consults the list of representation types it has and sends back the “best” match. |
|
http://norman.walsh.name/2003/07/02/conneg
|
|
| |
| | Transparent content negotiation pointers & status |
| | `Content negotiation was planned from the early days as a flexibility point which separated HTTP and HTML, and would allow evolution of the web in ways we do not yet envision.' <--- Actual TimBL quote Koen. | | | A: TCN was built with extensibility in mind, so there would be no problem in extending it at some point in the future. | | | draft-ietf-http-negotiation-01.txt `Transparent Content Negotiation in HTTP' Defines the core mechanism. |
|
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-talk/msg03333.html
|
|
| |
| | Content negotiation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia |
| | Content negotiation is a mechanism defined in the HTTP specification that makes it possible to serve different versions of a document (or more generally, a resource) at the same URL, so that user agents can choose which version fit their capabilities the best. | | | One of the most classical uses of this mechanism is to serve an image as both GIF and PNG, so that a browser that doesn't understand PNG can still display the GIF version. | | | Wikimedia needs your help in its US$200,000 fund drive. |
|
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Content_negotiation
|
|
| |
| | Rewrite URLs with Content Negotiation - no file extension url rewriting - Speed Tweak of the Week |
| | Different languages, file types, content encodings, and character sets can be automatically delivered to different browsers based on browser-supplied preferences sent in header requests. | | | Abbreviating URLs with content negotiation is a good way to abstract your URLs and save a few bytes per resource. | | | You can make your URLs shorter and more abstract by using content negotiation to strip file extensions from your markup and source code. |
|
http://www.websiteoptimization.com/speed/tweak/rewrite
|
|
| |
| | Re: Content negotiation |
| | Content-negotiation should be more for >user-preferences, presence or absence of certain helper apps, and >other coarse grained and dynamic decisions that occur at a fairly high >level. | | | Although we may want to make recommendations as to how helper apps should appear in Accept, basically none of the Accept-* stuff changes..... | | | Other servers (or server-maintainers) might value performance over fine-grained negotiation and may ignore the DTD. |
|
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-talk/msg01879.html
|
|
| |
| | Content negotiation is a debacle |
| | An amusing look at the complex world of content rights followed. | | | What kind of DRM was involved and could PVR machines capture it? | | | Showing content on a computer screen means negotiating a different set of rights from showing it on a set top box. |
|
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=18792
|
|
| |
| | HP Labs : Tech Report: HPL-2001-190: Implementing Content Negotiation using |
| | The Jena RDF Framework developed at HP Labs is used to implement a negotiation algorithm similar to that used by Apache Web Server. | | | As CC/PP is compatible with the forthcoming Wireless Access Protocol (WAP) User Agent Profile (UAProf) these techniques are applicable to the next generation of WAP devices. | | | Abstract: Content negotiation is a technique relevant to device independence that allows servers to provide clients with the most appropriate resource from a number of alternates. |
|
http://www.hpl.hp.com/techreports/2001/HPL-2001-190.html
|
|
| |
| | [No title] |
| | As much as possible, the group will endeavor to create a framework for exchange sturdy enough to handle the later addition of this type of negotiation. | | | Experimental methods for using these features and feature sets within specific protocol contexts may be developed within this group or within the groups standardizing the relevant protocols. | | | The working group is aware of applications which desire to negotiate what content is delivered as well as the form in which it is delivered. |
|
http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/OLD/conneg-charter.html
|
|
|
