- From: Larry Masinter <masinter@parc.xerox.com>
- Date: Tue, 17 Oct 1995 21:35:09 PDT
- To: fielding@avron.ICS.UCI.EDU
- Cc: http-wg%cuckoo.hpl.hp.com@hplb.hpl.hp.com
someone: > The accept-signature (or accept-hash) proposed by Larry > Masinter looks better. Roy: > Only if you assume that the accept headers will never be configurable > on a per-client basis, in which case we might as well get rid of them > altogether. No, not really. The main advantage is when the server only has one presentation and the client is willing to accept: */*. In this case, the server can ignore the accept altogether. The second case is where the client only accepts a limited number of types for an embedded figure; but in this case, different instances of the same browser are likely to accept the same embed capabilities. This does lead me to believe that along with the hash of content-negotiation tags, you need to send another bit, which is whether this request will accept: */*.
Received on Tuesday, 17 October 1995 21:38:21 UTC