3 ms·
Omg, looking at the user agent client hint proposal, it is a nightmare of complexity! For such a trivial thing, you will now have dozens of headers. And one of
by greatgib 5y ago
Omg, looking at the user agent client hint proposal, it is a nightmare of complexity!
For such a trivial thing, you will now have dozens of headers. And one of the force of user agents string was the fact of not being "fixed" in term of format but to allow unexpected evolution.
The issue with it that worth to be solved is just the mountain of lies with browser not assuming their id but having to list all their ancestors.
Also, again something that itch my brain with a new case of Google controlled info:
<<Note the word "secure" in the paragraph above, and the SecureContext attribute in the IDL: these client hints will not be delivered to plaintext endpoints. Non-secure HTTP will receive only the reduced User-Agent string, now and forever.>>
- zebracanevra 5y agothese user agent values leak data about your system, why would you want them to be sent unencrypted? loads and loads of new web APIs are moving to HTTPS only. this is not a Google specific thing. It's worth to note that Mozilla's position on this proposal is "harmful": https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/552 https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/552