W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-talk@w3.org > May to June 1995

Re: Content-lengths of dynamic objects

From: Jared Rhine <Jared_Rhine@hmc.edu>
Date: Tue, 9 May 1995 23:49:32 -0700
Message-Id: <199505100649.XAA20170@aslan.math.hmc.edu>
To: nazgul@utopia.com
Cc: Multiple recipients of list <www-talk@www10.w3.org>
[Citation date: Tue, 9 May 1995 22:58:03 +0500]
KH == Kee Hinckley <nazgul@utopia.com>

  KH> This has the disadvantage of leaving the user to wait until your
  KH> render is done.

  JRhine> ...we will obviously need some kind of boundary or packetized data
  JRhine> scheme; no getting around that, I suspect, if we want accurate
  JRhine> entity-body delimiting.

  KH> I think a packet oriented approach would help. I know at one time
  KH> there was talk of doing inline objects that way and interspersing the
  KH> packets so that you could do what Netscape does without opening
  KH> N-connections to the server. Obviously it seriously complicates the
  KH> protocols though.

That is a different issue and definitely best left to HTTP NG.  The original
issue was how to guarantee the client that they have received the full
entity-body, specifically how to do this for dynamic objects.  I suggested
that one way to handle this was to put the entity-body on disk and then use
content-length.  If you don't want to do that, I believe there are two
primary proposals: unique boundaries and packet encoding.  I don't think
packet encoding was ever discussed in the context of multiplexing a
connection, as you discuss.

Jared_Rhine@hmc.edu / HMC / <URL:http://www.hmc.edu/~jared/home>

"To hear many religious people talk, one would think God created the
 torso, head, legs and arms, but the devil slapped on the genitals."
        -- Don Schrader
Received on Wednesday, 10 May 1995 02:49:52 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Monday, 20 January 2020 16:08:17 UTC