Re: JSON headers

> On 9 Jul 2016, at 21:45, Poul-Henning Kamp <> wrote:
> Remember, I'm talking about a new HTTP version here, with a different
> and closely shaved semantic layer.
> In that version, I would argue that "anything weird" includes
> uncompressed data.

Fair enough. =) If we’re making supporting Content-Encoding: gzip mandatory, then that makes sense. However, in that world I’d want to say that we shouldn’t be implicitly appending identity, we should be implicitly appending gzip. If we’re saying that uncompressed data is weird, then you should have to ask for it explicitly, IMO.

> It was meant as a strawman to show how much improvement could be had,
> not as a final proposal :-)

Sure: that’s why I put it as a parenthetical note rather than stick on it. I just wanted to flag it now so that it’s dealt with at some point, because as I said earlier, I like the general shape of this.


Received on Monday, 11 July 2016 10:20:01 UTC