- From: Devdatta Akhawe <dev.akhawe@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2014 21:11:48 -0700
- To: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu>
- Cc: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, "public-webappsec@w3.org" <public-webappsec@w3.org>
>> Well, we aren't supporting progressive hashes right now. > > > I'd like to understand what that means. Does that mean the hash can't be > computed in a streaming fashion, but actually needs the entire decompressed > data in a single chunk (in memory?) to compute the hash? > > I'm really hoping I'm just misunderstanding this point.... Sorry. I was wrong. I got confused. You are right. The hash can be computed in a streaming fashion. The final "this is ok" can only be done after the hash has been computed on the whole file. > This seems reasonable, with one caveat: I would prefer there be no optional > behavior here. What the non-optional behavior should be depends on the > above question about streaming vs not. Given my clarification above, can you explain what should not be non-optional? Are you saying that the spec should require a "encoding=gzip" for files that will be saved to disk in a gzip'ed format? thanks Dev
Received on Saturday, 15 March 2014 04:12:37 UTC