Re: Content encoding problem...

Roy T. Fielding:
>
[...]
>Jeff said:
>>although I'd suggest thinking about changing the whole sentence
>>to read something like:
>>    If an Accept-Encoding header is present, and if the server cannot
>>    send a response which is acceptable according to the
>>    Accept-Encoding header, then the server SHOULD send a response
>>    using the default (identity) encoding.
>
>I like this new wording, regardless.

I don't think the existing wording is broken.  A response with _no_ encoding
is _always_ `acceptable according to the Accept-Encoding header'.  At least
that was my interpretation when I last reviewed this stuff.  The header
limits the use of encodings, but not the non-use of encodings.

[...]
> Content-Encoding is a property of the resource (i.e., only the origin
>server is capable of adding or removing it on the server-side, and only
>the user agent is capable of removing it on the client-side).

Not under 1.1 it isn't.  If no no-transform directive is present, caches may
change the type or encoding of the response.  See sections 13.5.2 and 14.9.5.

And yes, I complained when this change was made.  Skimming the archives, I
see that you were against it too, but I recall that it was decided to allow
it in the end.

>.....Roy

Koen.