W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > April to June 2009

Re: Content Sniffing impact on HTTPbis - #155

From: Henrik Nordstrom <henrik@henriknordstrom.net>
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2009 12:00:22 +0200
To: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
Cc: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <1245319222.15069.349.camel@localhost.localdomain>
ons 2009-06-17 klockan 00:39 +0200 skrev Bjoern Hoehrmann:

> The current draft uses the term "resource" in several senses. Where
> it is meant to refer to a bit stream, neither resource nor represen-
> tation is appropriate; neither term makes it clear which bit stream
> it referred to, e.g., whether content encodings are removed or not.

Can you point out an example where this is ambiguous regarding encoding?

In HTTP content-encoding is never added/removed as part of normal
operations. Doing so creates a new resource variant, same as selecting a
different language or media type.

Agents naturally must remove content-encoding in their presentation
layer, and non-shared caches MAY to optimize reuse but if they do it's
their responsibility to properly handle the difference.

Received on Thursday, 18 June 2009 10:01:01 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 1 March 2016 11:10:49 UTC