- From: Lou Montulli <montulli@mozilla.com>
- Date: Mon, 13 Nov 1995 14:33:25 -0800
- To: Gavin Nicol <gtn@ebt.com>
- Cc: fielding@avron.ICS.UCI.EDU, masinter@parc.xerox.com, ari@netscape.com, john@math.nwu.edu, http-wg%cuckoo.hpl.hp.com@hplb.hpl.hp.com
Gavin Nicol wrote:
>
> >You and Larry are looking at this problem with blinders on.
> >There are many more uses for byterange URL's than simply
> >PDF files. For instance Netscape 2.0 uses byteranges to
> >request parts of files that it didn't get the last time
> >you came to a page.
>
> And then you have to reparse the entire document again, and re-render
> it, possibly ignoring the errors caused by the file being
> incomplete. This is great for small pages, but if you try fetching
> small peices of a 5MB document, it makes no sense.
What makes you think it makes no sense. An If-modified-since
request can guarantee that the object hasn't changed. From
there it's just a simple matter of requesting the parts that
are missing.
>
> Byte ranges are a lazy replacement for a general naming mechanism.
What's your naming scheme for JPEG files? How about AVI
video streams? Bytes are already a general purpose naming scheme,
and they have been used for a number of years. There is no
need to invent another one.
:lou
--
Lou Montulli http://www.netscape.com/people/montulli/
Netscape Communications Corp.
Received on Monday, 13 November 1995 14:39:25 UTC