In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Ben Bucksch) wrote:
> I propose the following changes to the UA-string:
>
> Bug 55366
> The language part currently shows the language of the used chrome
> localization. The HTTP explicitly discourages revealing the UI language
> to the site. I suggest to always return "en".
Would removing the UI language break something? Removing the UI language
altogether would save a couple of bytes on each request. :-)
> * "WinNT" for Windows NT 3.x, 4.0, W2K, Windows XP etc.
> * "Win9x" for Win95, 98, ME
> * "Win" as fallback
That's, IMO, better than the current situation. But why no just say
"Windows" for all versions of Windows?
> Mac unknown.
Some people have argued that Mozilla should identify itself differently,
if it runs on Mac OS X. The reasoning is
* serve different pages (IMO a *very* bad reason)
* curiosity.
http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=71568
In general, I don't like revealing any more details. It is none of the
site admins business which OS I use. (And IE, iCab and Opera don't
report that they are on Mac OS X.)
I think users benefit from the OS reporting only if the OS is reported
to be non-Windows. It reminds the authors that using Windows-only
formats is a bad thing. But saying more specifically which non-Windows
you are using has little or no user benefit.
--
Henri Sivonen
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.clinet.fi/~henris/
