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: Scott Lawrence <lawrence@agranat.com>
Date: Tue, 22 Jul 1997 08:46:03 -0400
Message-Id: <199707221246.IAA16422@devnix.agranat.com>
To: http-wg%cuckoo.hpl.hp.com@hplb.hpl.hp.com

>>>>> "JM" == Jeffrey Mogul <mogul@pa.dec.com> writes:

JM> The CONTENT-ENCODING issue:
JM> 	http://www.w3.org/pub/WWW/Protocols/HTTP/Issues/#CONTENT-ENCODING

JM> has been assigned to myself and Henrik for resolution.  We're pretty
JM> close to solving most of it, except for a seemingly minor concern:
JM> How does a client say "don't send me the 'identity' encoding"?

  I don't think this is a serious enough concern to merit doing
  anything at all.  If this is not possible that's just fine.

  That having been said, the q-value solution would seem the best to
  me.  I prefer not to use '*' for this, so my choice from your
  alternatives would be:

JM>   (c)	Accept-Encoding: gzip, compress, identity;q=0.0

  Our server doesn't currently do anything with Accept-Encoding (our
  customers generally don't have the storage to devote to storing
  multiple encodings, and don't want the CPU spending time creating
  them) so we have no backward compatibility issue.

--
Scott Lawrence           EmWeb Embedded Server       <lawrence@agranat.com>
Agranat Systems, Inc.        Engineering            http://www.agranat.com/
Received on Tuesday, 22 July 1997 05:57:15 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 24 September 2003 06:32:48 EDT