- From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2009 11:22:43 +1100
- To: Roy T. Fielding <fielding@gbiv.com>
- Cc: Carine Bournez <carine@w3.org>, ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Yes. If it doesn't preserve characters, all sorts of mess can result, e.g., with ETag comparison, range retrieval, etc. On 22/01/2009, at 7:01 AM, Roy T. Fielding wrote: > > On Jan 21, 2009, at 11:13 AM, Carine Bournez wrote: > >> Dear HTTPbis Working Group, >> >> The Efficient XML Interchange (EXI) Working Group is seeking advice >> and >> review of a proposal for a new registered HTTP content coding token >> called "exi". >> >> The EXI Working Group has discussed the content type management >> issue and >> is suggesting to use a Content-Encoding, whenever possible, in order >> to retain the original XML or XML-based media type (e.g. xhtml, rdf, >> svg...). We also register a fallback "application/exi" media type, >> for >> the protocols that have no Content-Encoding capability. > > No, it doesn't qualify as a content encoding or transfer encoding. > It is not decoded to the original type. It is just another media > type. > If you want to retain the original type (I have no idea why), then > put it in a parameter. E.g., application/exi;orig="svg" > > ....Roy > > -- Mark Nottingham http://www.mnot.net/
Received on Friday, 23 January 2009 00:23:22 UTC