- From: Roy T. Fielding <fielding@kiwi.ics.uci.edu>
- Date: Fri, 14 Nov 1997 13:18:27 -0800
- To: Jim Gettys <jg@pa.dec.com>
- Cc: http-wg%cuckoo.hpl.hp.com@hplb.hpl.hp.com
I have said before that the reason there is both a Content-Encoding and a Transfer-Encoding is that the former is a property of the resource and the latter is a transmission issue. The reason I say this is because the other metadata describing the entity always describes the entity-body as whole, e.g., Content-Encoding( Content-Type( data ) ) so that things like Content-MD5 and Range requests apply to the whole. >Then should then 100 bytes covered by the Range/Content-Range >refer to the second hundred bytes of the HTML file before >compression, or to the second hundred bytes of the compressed >form? The compressed form. >It seems to me that the only reasonable interpretation is that >Range/Content-Range should apply to the unencoded form of the >response, since the client's ultimate goal is to obtain a specific >piece of the unencoded form; the use of compression is only >a temporary phase that the response goes through while it is >being transmitted. This would assume the part of the server performing the range has access to the non-compressed data, which is false. ....Roy
Received on Friday, 14 November 1997 13:38:23 UTC