On Sunday, September 23, 2012 6:02:35 PM UTC-7, Nicholas Nethercote wrote: > On Fri, Sep 21, 2012 at 12:41 PM, Benoit Jacob <jacob.benoi...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > > > I would like to +1 on Henri's answer to make it clear that the outcome > > > of this thread is not quite a nod to go ahead. > > > > I'd upgrade your "not quite" to "definitely not" :) > > > > We got a bit distracted by the net neutrality comparison, but I'd > > summarize the thread as "lots of opposition and little (if any) > > support". In the past we've fought tooth and nail to (a) simply the > > UA and (b) get people to stop looking at it, for good reasons. We'd > > be crazy to change tack now. > > > > Nick
Just to quickly add in the conclusion that was brought up in the mobile web compatibility meeting about this thread: We concluded that this isn't a good idea to go forward with for the following reasons: 1. It could promote UA sniffing behavior, which is exactly what were trying to move away from. 2. We're getting lots of push back from WURFL that we need to finalize a consistent UA. Right now, we can't complete our outreach to WURFL because the assumption is that we changing our UA too much too quickly right now. 3. For v1, we probably need to still stick to the original plan for the UA that does include Android in the UA, even though that's sub-optimal to receive Android specific content. We should move to the optimal UA in long-term though without the platform identifier. _______________________________________________ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
