Larry Masinter wrote: > One use case for large content size files that aren't downloaded > in entirety are JPEG2000 image files using only range retrieval, I've also seen ranges used to stream video in a home video display system. It actually fetches about a frame's worth of data with each request. (Why they don't just stream it starting from a particular position, I've no idea). The streamed files are vastly larger than the client could possibly store. > It's realistic to expect implementations to use 64-bit integers for > quantities that reasonably exceed 32-bit representations, I don't agree; many implementations couldn't possibly store anything that big (e.g. a mobile phone), and if they have no reason to do range requests from a large resource, there's no point in them handling 64-bit size values. But, > it's realistic to expect implementations to check (and fail > gracefully) when any received protocol value exceeds its > representation capacity. on that I wholeheartedly agree. It's not hard; there's no good excuse. I'm astonished and disappointed that Microsoft screwed that up. -- JAmieReceived on Saturday, 6 January 2007 17:40:43 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 06:50:00 GMT