W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > October to December 2011

Re: Enable compression of a blob to .zip file

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Fri, 02 Dec 2011 14:22:59 +0100
Message-ID: <4ED8D133.5050009@gmx.de>
To: Charles Pritchard <chuck@jumis.com>
CC: "public-webapps@w3.org" <public-webapps@w3.org>
On 2011-11-30 19:42, Charles Pritchard wrote:
> On 11/30/2011 8:04 AM, Julian Reschke wrote:
>> On 2011-11-30 16:50, Charles Pritchard wrote:
>>>> Nope. If you need gzipped SVG in data URIs, the right thing to do is
>>>> to either extend data URIs to support that, or to mint a separate
>>>> media type.
>>>
>>> Why? Seems like a lot of complexity for blob, data and file for
>>> something that could otherwise be handled by minimal code.
>>
>> It would mean that the semantics of a data URI depends on who's
>> processing it. It would probably also cause lots of confusion about
>> what types is applies to.
>
> It's already the case that data URIs depend on UA quirks.

There's no reason to add more quirks. Instead we should try to remove 
the quirks.

> SVG support is highly implementation dependent.
>
> This issue would apply to one type, SVG.
> It's feature detectable through img src events.
>
> This would greatly improve the ability to use data:uris for SVG content.
> SVG can be highly compressible.

Yes. So is HTML. What's the benefit of compressing SVG first and then 
BASE64-encoding it, over having it just URI-escaped, and gzip the whole 
HTML page (something most servers will automatically do for you)?

> There's been a 9 years of lingering bug reports area:
>
> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=157514
> https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=5246
> http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/pkix/current/msg27507.html
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-svg/2011May/0128.html
> http://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=76968

Indeed. It seems that except Opera all browsers do this right.

Again: it can be done, but it should be done correctly.

Defining a separate media type is the simplest thing to do here.

> ...

Best regards, Julian
Received on Friday, 2 December 2011 13:24:21 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 18:49:49 GMT