Visual RFC.
ALL RFCs / RFC 8674
Read the RFC ↗
RFC 8674 / REQUEST AND INTERPRET A PREFERENCE

Site criteria and stored settings

03

Different sites can define safer content differently. A site with several levels needs a documented default and a way to resolve local settings while honoring the incoming preference.

RFC 8674 · § 2EXAMPLE
3 / 3
Site criteria and stored settingsIndependent fictional site examples first demonstrate that no universal content criteria are assigned: site A filters graphic previews and B limits explicit descriptions. A multi-level site then documents a reasonable default and optional finer settings. Finally an arrived safe request is being honored, while a local stored off setting is stopped from weakening that behavior. This illustrates Appendix B advice and a site-specific safer interpretation, not a new uppercase MUST or universal numeric ranking.Fictional criteria · not a universal ratingIncoming hintHonoring sitePrefer: safe arrivesstored off → disable hintChoose the safer local interpretationAppendix B advice while honoring safeSite support remains optional
03
Keep a local off switch from weakening the hint.

The request has arrived and the site is honoring it. A stored off setting cannot silently disable that behavior in this advised design; select the safer interpretation by the documented local criteria.

Source for this drawing: RFC 8674 · Read RFC section 2 ↗

Protocol participantThreat or exceptionProtocol controlSimplified drawings · precise section references
New to this? Start hereA quick picture + helpful background

A message needs an address.

Think of a packet as a small addressed envelope. Devices pass it onward; transport protocols decide what delivery promises an application gets.

Helpful first, if these ideas are unfamiliar

These pictures are analogies to help you learn. The linked RFC explains the actual rules.

Terms in this drawing
Site criteria
The receiving site’s documented interpretation of safer content.
Stored setting
A local preference that may need reconciliation with the incoming hint.
Related RFCs and changes

“Updates” changes part of an earlier RFC. “Obsoletes” replaces it. This list shows selected related documents.

KEY POINT

Document the site’s meaning and preserve the safer interpretation while honoring the hint.

  • There is no universal content rating or precise cross-cultural definition here. The fictional site criteria in the diagram are examples, not rules assigned by the RFC.
  • With fine-grained safety levels, servers SHOULD select a reasonable default and document how requests are interpreted. They MAY provide other mechanisms, such as cookies, to fine-tune behavior.
  • Appendix B advises that a site honoring the incoming preference ought not allow its own interface to disable that behavior. Where stored settings and the hint differ, choose the safer interpretation under that site’s criteria; the RFC defines no universal numeric scale.
DETAILS

The third state assumes a cooperating site has decided to honor safe. It does not override the earlier fact that support is optional. Appendix advice is kept distinct from uppercase MUST/SHOULD/MAY requirements. Existing stored settings, fictional here, are not identity or age evidence.

Read the RFC section ↗

All chapters in RFC 8674

Drawing view

Scroll the drawing to see every part. Playback controls stay above it.

RFC 9700 / CHAPTERS

Chapters

For full details, tables, algorithms, and exceptions, read the original RFC.

RFC status and corrections ↗