W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > July 2011

[whatwg] Why deflate-stream is required to be enabled by the WebSocket API?

From: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2011 02:38:57 +0200
Message-ID: <nqse27djdsv8hi3qjv9nj4egh27eurc3eh@hive.bjoern.hoehrmann.de>
* Adam Barth wrote:
>On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 4:56 PM, Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi at gmx.net> wrote:
>> There is draft-tyoshino-hybi-websocket-perframe-deflate for that. It's
>> not a solution to the problem Takeshi Yoshino raised though, which is
>> about whether Websocket API conformance should impose restrictions on
>> which Websocket extensions must and must not be supported, as far as I
>> understand it anyway.
>
>It seems pretty clear that the API specify whatever profile of the
>protocol we choose.  We do the same thing with HTTP (e.g., with the
>XMLHttpRequest API).

HTTP allows you to send messages with `Transfer-Encoding: gzip,chunked`.
Opera supports that in responses, most other browsers do not. The XML-
HttpRequest specification takes no position on that, you can conform to
it whether the XMLHttpRequest implementation supports that or not. The
browsers do agree on supporting `Content-Encoding: gzip`, but again the
XMLHttpRequest specification does not require or prohibit supporting it.
-- 
Bj?rn H?hrmann ? mailto:bjoern at hoehrmann.de ? http://bjoern.hoehrmann.de
Am Badedeich 7 ? Telefon: +49(0)160/4415681 ? http://www.bjoernsworld.de
25899 Dageb?ll ? PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78 ? http://www.websitedev.de/ 
Received on Wednesday, 20 July 2011 17:38:57 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wednesday, 22 January 2020 16:59:34 UTC