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

Re: Comments on Byte range draft

From: Larry Masinter <masinter@parc.xerox.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Nov 1995 13:33:22 PST
To: http-wg%cuckoo.hpl.hp.com@hplb.hpl.hp.com
Message-Id: <95Nov13.133323pst.2733@golden.parc.xerox.com>
If you want to encode byte ranges into URLs, you should also encode
the unique ID of the actual data stream.

So, if I start to GET  http://slow.host.dom/images/logo.gif HTTP/1.0

and then cancel the transfer, and then later on want to get the rest
of the data stream, I shouldn't use

	"http://slow.host.dom/images/logo.gif;bytes=500-" 

but rather
        "http://slow.host.dom/cid:0102345@slow.host.dom#bytes=500-" 

where 
	0102345@slow.host.dom

is the content-id URL for the content that was originally being
delivered with /images/logo.gif in the first place.

That is, the URL for partial content needs to identify the exact
content from which the remaining bytes are to be extracted.

Note that "#" is currently illegal in a URL as it is the separator
between the URL and the client-side selector of the URI. In this case,
you could propose that when the server is willing to retrieve partial
content that the server could perform what is logically a client-side
extraction, it's allowed when applied to a uniquely identified
content.
Received on Monday, 13 November 1995 13:38:12 EST

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 24 September 2003 06:31:35 EDT