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

Re: Content-Transfer-Encoding "packet"

From: <Harald.T.Alvestrand@uninett.no>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 1995 13:29:07 +0200
Message-Id: <199507261129.NAA04339@dale.uninett.no>
To: Roy Fielding <fielding@beach.w3.org>
Cc: http-wg%cuckoo.hpl.hp.com@hplb.hpl.hp.com
two points:

- MIME is an installed base now, and we can't change labels on them just
  because the meaning of the labels in current practice doesn't fit the
  meaning of the labels in English
- The MIME spec deliberately made it harder to register a c-t-e than it
  is to register a content-type, because having more destroys interoperability.
- There were fierce battles in the MIME group about whether to ban nested
  c-t-es outright, discourage the practice, or allow it. I don't think that
  it is a choice one should make without thinking about it carefully.

If you want to name it transfer-encoding, because that is what it is, fine,
and if you want to remove content-transfer-encoding entirely from HTTP,
I wouldn't mind too much, but using the same label with different semantics
than in MIME is, IMHO, going to lead to problems.

       Harald A
Received on Wednesday, 26 July 1995 04:35:15 UTC

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