Robert Collins wrote:
> Two cases: One is compression, the other is with operations on the data
> which may (deterministicly) change the body - ie Joe & Moez's
> acceleration url rewriting. While the second case is rare, I don't want
> to confuse browsers because of it :]
I would not dream of trying to support range requests in entity
rewriting setups of any kind, except possibly cache hits on already
rewritten content, but even for hits I have doubts. You must be 100%
sure that the rewrite is identical to what would have been done if the
filter worked on the whole entity, and that the requestor bases his
request on a entity fragments with the exact same rewrites applied..
Note that the above worry applies to entity rewrites, not
transfer-encodings.
> Also other things allowed but not recommended, such as content-type
> transformations will need to interact cleanly with transfer-encoding.
Hint: transfer-encoding is a hop-by-hop thing taking place in the
communication between two or more hops. content-transformation is a
entity operation taking place at one or more of the hops.
/Henrik
Received on Thu Feb 08 2001 - 01:19:42 MST
This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Tue Dec 09 2003 - 16:13:28 MST