- From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2014 20:43:55 -0700
- To: David Morris <dwm@xpasc.com>
- Cc: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, William Chan (ιζΊζ) <willchan@chromium.org>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On 17 March 2014 18:36, David Morris <dwm@xpasc.com> wrote: > I think a client and server is always involved, so I think this issue is > client compression of request content and server handling that compressed > input. > > I think that server originating gzip compressed content and the client > being required to handle it is NOT the issue being discussed here? Correct on both aspects. This is *request* compression. I'll note that there is nothing stopping a client from trying and maybe failing to compress, or for specific applications to require support of compression, or to have client send content types that use compression in preference to uncompressed content. But requiring support for a specific content-encoding is, as I think we've concluded, perhaps a little too ambitious.
Received on Tuesday, 18 March 2014 03:44:23 UTC