- From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2015 12:23:50 +1100
- To: "Julian F. Reschke" <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Cc: "ietf-http-wg@w3.org" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On 2 Feb 2015, at 7:18 pm, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> wrote: > > On 2015-02-02 09:07, Mark Nottingham wrote: >> Yes, but the semantics of those headers are exactly the same in both directions. > > I think that's the case here, too. No? No. The existing, client-to-server semantic of Accept-Encoding is "For the response associated with this request, I will accept the following encodings..." In the server-to-client direction, the proposed semantic is "For some unbounded set of future requests, I might accept the following encodings..." There are a number of subtle differences there, especially about the scope of applicability -- one of the most ill-defined areas in HTTP metadata. -- Mark Nottingham https://www.mnot.net/
Received on Monday, 9 February 2015 01:24:18 UTC