On 15 July 2014 14:28, Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com> wrote:
> The reasons I cited are still relevant considering that most entries
> don't have associated values.
>
Well of course literal fields with index'd names will be copied into the
header table. That is an entirely different matter than copying an indexed
static field.
To be precise I am concerned with the text in 4.1 that says:
An _indexed representation_ corresponding to an entry _not present_
in the reference set entails the following actions:
o If referencing an element of the static table:
* The header field corresponding to the referenced entry is
emitted.
* The referenced static entry is inserted at the beginning of the
header table.
* A reference to this new header table entry is added to the
reference set, unless this new entry didn't fit in the header
table.
I believe that if we do not have a reference set, then this should just
become:
An _indexed representation_ entails the following actions:
o If referencing an element of the static table:
* The header field corresponding to the referenced entry is
emitted.
I just cannot understand why you wish to create an entry in the dynamic
table whenever the static table index is used for something like
:status:200 ? I only just accepted the reason that it limited the
reference set size to 0 if the header table size was set to 0. Now there
is no reference set, there is no reason for this.
--
Greg Wilkins <gregw@intalio.com>
http://eclipse.org/jetty HTTP, SPDY, Websocket server and client that scales
http://www.webtide.com advice and support for jetty and cometd.
Received on Tuesday, 15 July 2014 04:40:28 UTC