RE: SVG12: Transfer-Encoding

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