W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > January to March 2013

Re: Delta Compression and UTF-8 Header Values

From: Roberto Peon <grmocg@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2013 16:01:04 -0800
Message-ID: <CAP+FsNeU6g7K3WQdA4V+=PhxOyzup6Ajp8NJ4asVaric1Uktww@mail.gmail.com>
To: James Cloos <cloos@jhcloos.com>
Cc: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, "ietf-http-wg@w3.org" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Agreed.
-=R


On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 3:41 PM, James Cloos <cloos@jhcloos.com> wrote:

> >>>>> "RP" == Roberto Peon <grmocg@gmail.com> writes:
>
> RP> The header names are almost completely handled with the pre-seeded
> RP> dictionary, so they really don't affect the character frequency
> RP> count and/or thus the huffman encoding.
>
> RP> Arithmetic coding gets better compression ratios, at the expense of
> RP> gobs of CPU and complexity. I don't think that is a good tradeoff :/
>
> It is sometimes hard to guess whether huffman is chosen due to inertia,
> arithmetic patent agnst, or good technical reasons.  It is good to know
> that in this case it is the latter.
>
> I may not have expressed my primary point quite well enough though:
>
> Although I doubt that right now there is any text in the headers which
> is both common enough to warrent inclusion in a static table and not
> seven-bit clean, my point was that even if such text shows up over time,
> the fact that it is not seven-bit should not prevent its inclusion in
> future, extended versions of the static table.  As such specifying that
> text is defined to be utf-8 and the use of a static huffman table should
> not contra-indicate each other.
>
> -JimC
> --
> James Cloos <cloos@jhcloos.com>         OpenPGP: 1024D/ED7DAEA6
>
Received on Wednesday, 13 February 2013 00:01:36 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 13 February 2013 00:01:40 GMT