- From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
- Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2016 20:48:21 +1100
- To: Kari Hurtta <hurtta-ietf@elmme-mailer.org>
- Cc: HTTP working group mailing list <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
On 15 October 2016 at 17:10, Kari Hurtta <hurtta-ietf@elmme-mailer.org> wrote: >> ...where the only difference is that any content coding that *can* have >> parameters MUST have an associated entry in CE-params. > > This looks like good idea and is unambiguous. I think that I will need to find a solution to this, and I think that Julian's (originally phk's) suggestion to put the content encoding label at the head of each value is a great one in light of this feedback. However, maybe we can dispense with the notion that there is a generic need for content-encoding parameters (and thus avoid the name change). I will work on a proposal when it's not late, the weekend, etc...
Received on Saturday, 15 October 2016 09:48:49 UTC