#1078: Reduce Accept-Language

Visit on Github.

Opened Apr 3, 2025

Hi there TAG,

I'm requesting a TAG review of Reduce Accept-Language and the plan to reduce the information available in the Accept-Language HTTP header first, and then reduce related JS APIs navigator.languages in future phases.

Chrome (and other browsers) send all of the user's language preferences on every HTTP request via the Accept-Language header. The header's value contains a lot of entropy about the user that is sent to servers by default. We want to reduce the amount of information the Accept-Language header exposes in HTTP requests and JS interface navigator.languages. Instead of sending all user’s Accept-Language, we only send the user’s most preferred language after language negotiation in the Accept-Language header. For the HTTP Accept-Language header, we will potentially expand a base language based on the language-region pair. The JS getter navigator.languages returns the same value as navigator.language.

Further details:

  • I have reviewed the TAG's Web Platform Design Principles
  • Relevant time constraints or deadlines: We will consider starting roll-out in Chrome stable population 2025 Q2.
  • The group where the work on this specification is currently being done: N/A
  • The group where standardization of this work is intended to be done (if current group is a community group or other incubation venue): N/A

Discussions

Log in to see TAG-private discussions.

Discussed Apr 1, 2025 (See Github)

Discussion in https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews-private-brainstorming/issues/139.

Jeffrey: This isn't under time pressure: there's ongoing discussion on the Google side.

Christian volunteers to draft a comment.

Xiaocheng: fine with just reiterating the points; there's a lot of controversy.

Comment by @aphillips Apr 24, 2025 (See Github)

In I18N's 2025-04-24 call, our WG agreed to raise this issue to 'needs-resolution', not because we support this proposal, but as a signal of our reasonably intense interest in the outcome here.

some i18n concerns have been raised, but our experimental data doesn’t align with them

I18N has not seen the "experimental data". Can a pointer be provided?