- From: Larry Masinter <masinter@parc.xerox.com>
- Date: Sat, 11 Nov 1995 19:01:30 PST
- To: montulli@mozilla.com
- Cc: fielding@avron.ICS.UCI.EDU, ari@netscape.com, john@math.nwu.edu, http-wg%cuckoo.hpl.hp.com@hplb.hpl.hp.com
> You and Larry are looking at this problem with blinders on. > There are many more uses for byterange URL's than simply > PDF files. For instance Netscape 2.0 uses byteranges to > request parts of files that it didn't get the last time > you came to a page. You can therefore interrupt a page > during download at any time and continue it exactly > where you left off when you come back to the page. This > makes cachine up to 50% more effective at saving bandwidth. Yes, byte ranges are GREAT! They're wonderful. We should definitely have byte ranges in HTTP! It's a wonderful addition. Honest! They just don't belong at the end of arbitrary URLs. Maybe you want to define a new URL scheme that calls out a new extension to the HTTP protocol?
Received on Saturday, 11 November 1995 19:06:37 UTC