- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Thu, 09 Apr 2009 17:31:05 +0200
- To: Brian Smith <brian@briansmith.org>
- CC: 'HTTP Working Group' <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Brian Smith wrote: > Julian Reschke wrote: >> Brian Smith wrote: >>> My suggestion is: >>> >>> 1. Remove 3.2.1 completely. >> I think this goes to far, as it explains the interaction between >> Content-Encoding and Content-Type. > > It is already explained well enough in 5.5, particularly in the section you > quoted below. The explanation in 3.2.1 also has the same problem you mention > below; "Content-Encoding(Content-Type(data))" doesn't make sense when there > is no Content-Type, especially if there is no default content-type. Disagreed; I think the concept itself needs to be explained as part of Section 3, and not be hidden in the definition of a specific header. >> Related issue: Section 5.5 currently is phrased as if Content-Encoding >> only works in presence of Content-Type: >> >> "The entity-header field "Content-Encoding" is used as a modifier to >> the >> media-type. When present, its value indicates what additional content >> codings have been applied to the entity-body, and thus what decoding >> mechanisms must be applied in order to obtain the media-type referenced >> by the Content-Type header field." >> >> It seems to me we should rephrase that as well. > > Additionally, the whole description of Content-Encoding is written > specifically for HTTP responses (e.g. "request-target", "...the response > MUST include...". Indeed. BR, Julian PS: Mark, should we fix all of this as part of issue 155, or do we want to track this separately?
Received on Thursday, 9 April 2009 15:31:52 UTC