- From: Graham Klyne <GK@acm.org>
- Date: Fri, 04 Jul 1997 00:02:56 +0100
- To: Henrik Frystyk Nielsen <frystyk@w3.org>
- Cc: http-wg@cuckoo.hpl.hp.com
At 03:17 PM 7/3/97 -0400, Henrik Frystyk Nielsen wrote: > >I don't like the notion of the "server" having a content-coding. >Content-codings are properties of the resource and not the server. Transfer >codings are properties of the server. I would say "not necessarily". I note that the TCN draft treats this issue as being orthogonal to resource alternatives. Also, I think it is possible that a proxy might be able to offer a content-encoding not offered by the origin server. >There is really no difference between content-types and content-encodings >except that old clients fail to understand the latter. [...] I note that RFC 2068 section 14.12 implies otherwise, in that it indicates that content encoding is used as a *modifier* to a content-type (i.e. not something which can replace a content type). GK. --- ------------ Graham Klyne GK@ACM.ORG
Received on Thursday, 3 July 1997 16:06:45 UTC