- From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2014 10:31:20 -0800
- To: Michael Sweet <msweet@apple.com>
- Cc: Jesse Wilson <jesse@swank.ca>, Jeff Pinner <jpinner@twitter.com>, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, Zhong Yu <zhong.j.yu@gmail.com>, Roberto Peon <grmocg@gmail.com>, Patrick McManus <mcmanus@ducksong.com>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On 25 February 2014 10:27, Michael Sweet <msweet@apple.com> wrote: > That's a good (but unfortunate) point, and one that has also caused > interoperability problems for IPP which normatively ties "deflate" to RFC > 1951 (raw deflate) and not to RFC 1950 (zlib format) like HTTP/1.1 does... > :/ That's an interesting point. Are you suggesting that IPP is intentionally divergent from HTTP/1.1? If so, can you explain why that choice was made?
Received on Tuesday, 25 February 2014 18:31:47 UTC