W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > January to March 2009

Re: Review of Content-Encoding: value token

From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2009 14:46:19 +1100
Cc: "Roy T. Fielding" <fielding@gbiv.com>, Carine Bournez <carine@w3.org>, ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Message-Id: <82C9443B-7CC8-4589-9811-F2A39C77F79A@mnot.net>
To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>

Well, if we leave the text how it is, it will have that effect...

On 30/01/2009, at 7:29 PM, Julian Reschke wrote:

> Mark Nottingham wrote:
>> My concern is that many implementations treat content-coding like  
>> transfer-codings, in some ways; that is, they layer it in  
>> automatically (e.g., mod_gzip). The confluence of this with things  
>> like byteranges, etag comparison, etc. may be quite prone to bugs.
>> You'd also start to get into discussions like "can't JPEG just be a  
>> content-coding of GIF?" and so forth. The media type system isn't  
>> perfect by any means, but I think it's a better fit for this type  
>> of thing.
>> ...
> I agree with that, but right now the spec doesn't really state that.
> Should we change it?
> BR, Julian

Mark Nottingham     http://www.mnot.net/
Received on Tuesday, 3 February 2009 03:46:57 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 1 March 2016 11:10:48 UTC