W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg-old@w3.org > January to April 1995

Re: HTTP should be able to transfer part of a document

From: David Robinson <drtr1@cus.cam.ac.uk>
Date: Mon, 13 Mar 95 12:27 GMT
Message-Id: <m0ro9DL-0007akC@grus.cus.cam.ac.uk>
To: DINGLE@ksvi.mff.cuni.cz
Cc: http-wg%cuckoo.hpl.hp.com@hplb.hpl.hp.com
I think this should only be a transport issue, not a document issue.

Thus I think it is inappropriate to put bytes ranges into the URI.
If you do put byte ranges in the URI, then you are trying to identify
part of a resource; as Owen Rees said:
> The retrieval of parts of resources is more a question of the naming of the
> parts of a structured resource, and is not really an HTTP protocol issue. The
> question of what constitutes a resource, and how you name resources that are
> parts of collections is the sort of issue that crops up on the URI list, and
> an issue that does not seem to have any completely general solutions.

Whereas a transport protocol feature that allows partial document retrieval
is not attempting to name parts of resources. It's up to the client to
decide whether the data it was sent makes any sense in the context of earlier
retrievals. Obviously you would want the server to add object-body headers
to help the client, such as unique resource ids, last-modified dates etc.

Received on Monday, 13 March 1995 04:35:30 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:40:13 UTC