- From: Scott Lawrence <lawrence@agranat.com>
- Date: Tue, 22 Jul 1997 11:21:40 -0400
- To: http-wg%cuckoo.hpl.hp.com@hplb.hpl.hp.com
JM> The CONTENT-ENCODING issue: JM> http://www.w3.org/pub/WWW/Protocols/HTTP/Issues/#CONTENT-ENCODING JM> has been assigned to myself and Henrik for resolution. We're pretty JM> close to solving most of it, except for a seemingly minor concern: JM> How does a client say "don't send me the 'identity' encoding"? On further reflection, I really think that we should just not provide this capability at all. The server should always be free to just send the resource as is in response to the request. If the server has or can create a version of the resource in one of the acceptable encodings, it should send that, but I think that the implicit 'identity' coding (sent with no Content-Encoding header) should always be an acceptable response. If there is an Accept-Encoding header in the request, it should be interpreted as meaning that the listed encodings are acceptable in addition to the implicit 'identity'. I can't quite puzzle out from the reference on the issues list what the problem with this approach is. -- Scott Lawrence EmWeb Embedded Server <lawrence@agranat.com> Agranat Systems, Inc. Engineering http://www.agranat.com/
Received on Tuesday, 22 July 1997 08:26:52 UTC