From: Henrik Nordstrom [mailto:henrik@henriknordstrom.net] > On tis, 2007-08-07 at 14:20 +0100, Paul Marquess wrote: > > > 1. The definition of "deflate" needs to be rewritten to remove the > > ambiguity. > > Any suggestion? One possibility is to remove the reference to RFC 1951 completely. deflate The "zlib" format defined in RFC 1950 [31]. This variant keeps both RFC 1950 & 1951 but drops the troublesome labels. deflate The compressed data format defined in RFC 1950 [31] in combination with the compression mechanism described in RFC 1951 [29]. > I don't see how the definition is ambiguous, apart from the poor choice > of name (should have been zlib, not deflate). Indeed - the choice of name is the source of the ambiguity - there are two conflicting uses of "deflate" in the definition. If 2616 had used "zlib" instead of "deflate" the problem wouldn't have happened. PaulReceived on Tuesday, 7 August 2007 16:11:25 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:13:31 UTC