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

Re: Accept-Transfer header field (was HTTP/1.1 Issues: TRAILER_FIELDS)

From: Jeffrey Mogul <mogul@pa.dec.com>
Date: Tue, 18 Nov 97 16:48:06 PST
Message-Id: <9711190048.AA01167@acetes.pa.dec.com>
To: http-wg%cuckoo.hpl.hp.com@hplb.hpl.hp.com
X-Mailing-List: <http-wg@cuckoo.hpl.hp.com> archive/latest/4722
Henrik Frystyk Nielsen writes:

       Accept-Transfer  = "Accept-Transfer" ":"
                           1#( t-codings [ ";" "q" "=" qvalue ] )

Shouldn't that be:

       Accept-Transfer  = "Accept-Transfer" ":"
                           #( t-codings [ ";" "q" "=" qvalue ] )

since one of your examples is:


(I know, I made the same mistake for Accept-Encoding in rev-00.)

Also, since (as Roy has pointed out) the requirement for protecting
Accept-Transfer with Connection makes requests somewhat verbose,
perhaps we should be using a shorter name ... "Accept-Trans"
would save 6 bytes per request.  

I'm not even sure this header should be called "Accept-anything",
since it's a hop-by-hop mechanism and thus pretty much orthogonal
to content negotiation.  Maybe "OK-Trans" (saving another 8 bytes
per request)?  It's not as if any human being is supposed to be
reading these headers.


P.S.: OK, I *do* include HTTP implementors in the set of human
beings :-)
Received on Tuesday, 18 November 1997 16:53:37 UTC

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