W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-svg@w3.org > December 2004

Re: SVG12: image/svg+xml gzip requirements

From: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 01:06:52 +0100
To: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>
Cc: www-svg@w3.org, ietf-types@iana.org
Message-ID: <41ba3383.651153750@smtp.bjoern.hoehrmann.de>

* Chris Lilley wrote:
>>>No, it does not. An xml encoding declaration is sender provided
>>>metadata. However, in the case where a charset parameter is allowed, and
>>>where it can be different, and thus where one has to win over the other,
>>>metadata is indeed being overridden. I agree with you that silent
>>>recovery here is not inthe user interest and a warning should be shown.
>
>BH> You either missed that the mail you responded to did not discuss the
>BH> charset parameter at all, or you are trying to suggest that there is
>BH> a character encoding that is based on gzip.
>
>Neither, but you missed that I was deleting the bits about gzip and
>responding only to character encoding, not content transfer encoding. I
>should have signalled that with a change to the subject line.

I am sorry if my message gave you the impression that it is reasonable
to imply that it discussed anything but gzip compressed image/svg+xml
content that is not marked as such. I assumed that this was obvious from
the subject line, the context of the message, the parts I've quoted and
the literal message text which all mentioned gzip but did not mention
character encodings.
-- 
Björn Höhrmann · mailto:bjoern@hoehrmann.de · http://bjoern.hoehrmann.de
Weinh. Str. 22 · Telefon: +49(0)621/4309674 · http://www.bjoernsworld.de
68309 Mannheim · PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78 · http://www.websitedev.de/ 
Received on Saturday, 11 December 2004 00:07:11 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 8 March 2013 15:54:29 GMT