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

Re: Head response Transfer-Encoding: chunked?

From: Koen Holtman <koen@win.tue.nl>
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 1997 19:58:22 +0200 (MET DST)
Message-Id: <199709181758.TAA08527@wsooti08.win.tue.nl>
To: rlgray@raleigh.ibm.com
Cc: http-wg%cuckoo.hpl.hp.com@hplb.hpl.hp.com
X-Mailing-List: <http-wg@cuckoo.hpl.hp.com> archive/latest/4451
>My interpretation of the spec is that the HEAD response should contain
>*exactly* the headers it would if the method had been GET. 

I never interpreted the spec that way.  It has always been my
assumption that the server would be free to put less (or more) headers
in the HEAD response if it wanted to.

I think of chunked-ness as a property of a single response on a single
hop, not as a property of a resource.  As a HEAD response describes a
resource, it would be counter-intuitive for me to put a chunked header
in it, and I would certainly not assume that the absence of a chunked
header guarantees a lack of chunked-ness in a GET response from the
same resource.

> I have to
>admit that today our server does the same as Apache and Agranat, but
>assuming that others agree I plan to fix that.
>The scenario I imagine is a client that for whatever reason doesn't
>want to accept chunked; it issues head, sees that the document would be
>chunked, and changes the protocol version ot 1.0 for the GET.

Received on Thursday, 18 September 1997 11:06:15 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:40:21 UTC