W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > July to September 2007

Re: Clarification of the term "deflate"

From: Henrik Nordstrom <henrik@henriknordstrom.net>
Date: Thu, 09 Aug 2007 14:47:35 +0200
To: "Roy T. Fielding" <fielding@gbiv.com>
Cc: paul.marquess@ntlworld.com, ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Message-Id: <1186663655.16745.69.camel@henriknordstrom.net>
On tis, 2007-08-07 at 15:56 -0700, Roy T. Fielding wrote:

> Yes, but
> 
> <http://www.hpl.hp.com/personal/ange/archives/archives-96/http-wg- 
> archive/1343.html>
> 
> is no help.

And the mismatches in RFC references also doesn't help...

RFC1950 is zlib
RFC1951 is deflate
RFC1952 is gzip

discussion regarding the defalate & gzip entries was on RFC1951 &
RFC1952 it seems, which makes sense.

actual definition of deflate ended up to be RFC1950 using RFC1951.

> I had always thought deflate referred to the unwrapped
> format, whereas gzip refers to the wrapped format.

it's the intuitive choice.. but not how it got written.

> The problem
> is that there are advantages to storing the content in gzip format
> and selectively delivering it according to which T-E's or C-E's
> are listed as acceptable.

? how is that related?

> I think it is worthy of an issue number.

Probably.

But the question is what is the correct solution.

Regards
Henrik

Received on Thursday, 9 August 2007 12:47:53 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 06:50:15 GMT