W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg-old@w3.org > May to August 1997

Re: Any objections to "Accept-encoding: gzip, *;q=0"?

From: Phillip M. Hallam-Baker <hallam@ai.mit.edu>
Date: Mon, 21 Jul 1997 19:25:43 -0400
Message-Id: <199707212317.TAA19149@life.ai.mit.edu>
To: http-wg%cuckoo.hpl.hp.com@hplb.hpl.hp.com, Jeffrey Mogul <mogul@pa.dec.com>
X-Mailing-List: <http-wg@cuckoo.hpl.hp.com> archive/latest/3838
 >  (a) Accept-Encoding: gzip, compress, no-identity
> /* an explicit "no identity-encoding wanted" token */
>  (b) Accept-Encoding: gzip, compress, strict
> /* "strict" means "this set, or nothing" */
>  (c) Accept-Encoding: gzip, compress, identity;q=0.0
> /* allow qvalues here */

I think this is the best. it allows the case to be handled where the
source form is accepted but not ideal. Consider the case where the rank
of preferences is gzip / source / compress where gzip is prefered, and
the source form prefered over unix compress.

I think this is a more realistic case than "don't want the source at

>  (d) Accept-Encoding-Strict: gzip, compress
> /* define new header to avoid compatibility questions */

Ugh! Please, no more headers unless there is a serious problem with one
already defined!

I dislike the * proposal intensely. Best leave punctuation for use in
regular expressions and separators. It is always a mistake to use a
punctuation mark to stand for a symbol IMHO. identity is OK by my
reconning although NULL is shorter and may be more descriptive in this

Received on Monday, 21 July 1997 16:21:22 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:40:20 UTC