- From: Matthew Kerwin <matthew@kerwin.net.au>
- Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2014 08:24:18 +1000
- To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Received on Tuesday, 17 June 2014 22:24:46 UTC
On 18 June 2014 02:56, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> wrote: > On 2014-06-17 15:15, Matthew Kerwin wrote: > >> >> To my mind, this also opens up the idea of a 'bacc' range unit (bytes >> after content-coding), as an explicit signal that the client only >> wants the range if it's from the content-coded representation. AFAIU >> currently it's a bit ambiguous what to do when a request has both A-E >> and Range headers. Of course, 'bacc' requires there to be exactly one >> > > The ambiguity is caused by the client sending a request that selects > multiple representations. That's easy to avoid... > > Oh, yeah, because "identity;q=0" is allowed. Apologies for posting late at night. > > coding in the Accept-Encoding header, but it could be useful for >> resuming a content-coded download. The same caching issues as with >> 'bbcc' still apply, though. >> > > Best regards, Julian > > -- Matthew Kerwin http://matthew.kerwin.net.au/
Received on Tuesday, 17 June 2014 22:24:46 UTC