- From: Doug Schepers <doug.schepers@vectoreal.com>
- Date: Sat, 22 Jul 2006 11:08:00 -0400
- To: "'Bjoern Hoehrmann'" <derhoermi@gmx.net>
- Cc: <www-svg@w3.org>
Hi, Bjoern- Bjoern Hoehrmann wrote: | | File storage and use of the "svgz" "file extension" are | examples, there | are other ways to store content on a server and even where | file storage | is used, the file system may not have a notion of file name | extensions, and even if, the use of ".svgz" is not an absolute | requirement. So yes, the text is incorrect. Fair enough. I have changed it from "i.e." to "e.g.". | >"Note: Compression of stored content (the "entity," in HTTP terms) is | >distinct from automatic compression of the message body, as | >defined in HTTP/1.1 TE/ Transfer Encoding." | | The statement is trivial and any reader of this section can assumed to | be familiar with this information or expected to read up on it without | such clarification. The original statement is also incorrect, there is | no reason why the Working Group or reviewers should spend further time | on improving it. That there was opportunity for miscommunication about Content-Encoding versus Transfer-Encoding indicates that some clarification might help. Since you agree that it is trivial, and since the new statement is correct, I have made the change as above. Thanks- Doug, on behalf of the SVG WG
Received on Saturday, 22 July 2006 15:08:16 UTC