W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > October to December 2008

RE: must a partial response range be exact?

From: Brian Smith <brian@briansmith.org>
Date: Sun, 12 Oct 2008 20:32:57 -0500
To: "'Julian Reschke'" <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Cc: "'Henrik Nordstrom'" <henrik@henriknordstrom.net>, "'A. Rothman'" <amichai2@amichais.bounceme.net>, <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <719C729DA60E4221A964F1F0A5FABEA0@T60>

Julian Reschke wrote:
> I think I agree with all these statements.
> What I still want to know is: do we need to make any 
> additional changes to the spec? Is this all just
> "common sense", or should something of this become a
> normative requirement? If not, should it be 
> added as guidance?

Well, I derived all of that from RFC 2616 + common sense, so I don't think
any specification changes are necessary. 

I don't think the multipart/byteranges feature is valuable, because it
duplicates functionality that you can get with pipelined single-range
requests. So, the less effort spent on it, the better. Especially, I think
any clarifications here are much less important than other open issues. 

Received on Monday, 13 October 2008 01:33:47 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 1 March 2016 11:10:47 UTC