W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > September 2013

Re: [whatwg] Zip archives as first-class citizens

From: Robin Berjon <robin@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 13 Sep 2013 12:32:43 +0200
Message-ID: <5232E9CB.5010409@w3.org>
To: Simon Pieters <simonp@opera.com>
Cc: WHATWG <whatwg@whatwg.org>, Jake Archibald <jaffathecake@gmail.com>
On 29/08/2013 15:58 , Simon Pieters wrote:
> On Thu, 29 Aug 2013 15:02:48 +0200, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>
> wrote:
>> On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 1:19 PM, Jake Archibald
>> <jaffathecake@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Causing a network error in existing browsers is a shame.
>
> It seems to fail to resolve in IE10. It works in
> Gecko/WebKit/Blink/Presto: the %! is requested literally. However, both
> Apache and IIS seems to return 400 Bad Request.

That's not exactly promising.

>> Picking something that could occur in paths seems problematic.
>
> I'm not sure why it's more problematic than something than could occur
> in the fragment.
>
> For instance, the string "$zip=" is not present at all in
> http://webdevdata.org/ data set 18/06/2013. So maybe we could use a
> string like that in the path and have a graceful fallback path in legacy
> browsers that work in existing servers.

That's my preferred approach so far. However I wonder about the precise 
details.

Assuming <img src="/foo.zip/$zip=dahut.png"> I'm guessing that the 
browser would actually just request "/foo.zip" from the server in the 
same manner that fragments are stripped, right? Somehow the stripping 
bothers me a bit; for instance, what would Navigation Controller see?

I wonder if we couldn't just use the query part for this: <img 
src="/foo.zip?!zip/dahut.png">. No stripping is needed (as far as I know 
servers would normally just serve foo.zip in this case), which 
simplifies the model.

-- 
Robin Berjon - http://berjon.com/ - @robinberjon
Received on Friday, 13 September 2013 10:33:22 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wednesday, 22 January 2020 17:00:09 UTC