W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-svg@w3.org > July 2006

RE: SVG12: Transfer-Encoding

From: Doug Schepers <doug.schepers@vectoreal.com>
Date: Sat, 22 Jul 2006 11:08:00 -0400
To: "'Bjoern Hoehrmann'" <derhoermi@gmx.net>
Cc: <www-svg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <20060722150806.EA36D11F0B6@postalmail-a4.dreamhost.com>

Hi, Bjoern-

Bjoern Hoehrmann wrote:
| 
| File storage and use of the "svgz" "file extension" are 
| examples, there
| are other ways to store content on a server and even where 
| file storage
| is used, the file system may not have a notion of file name 
| extensions, and even if, the use of ".svgz" is not an absolute
| requirement. So yes, the text is incorrect.

Fair enough.  I have changed it from "i.e." to "e.g.".


| >"Note: Compression of stored content (the "entity," in HTTP terms) is
| >distinct from automatic compression of the message body, as 
| >defined in HTTP/1.1 TE/ Transfer Encoding."
| 
| The statement is trivial and any reader of this section can assumed to
| be familiar with this information or expected to read up on it without
| such clarification. The original statement is also incorrect, there is
| no reason why the Working Group or reviewers should spend further time
| on improving it.

That there was opportunity for miscommunication about Content-Encoding
versus Transfer-Encoding indicates that some clarification might help.
Since you agree that it is trivial, and since the new statement is correct,
I have made the change as above.

Thanks-
Doug, on behalf of the SVG WG
Received on Saturday, 22 July 2006 15:08:16 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 8 March 2013 15:54:35 GMT