httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Randy Terbush <>
Subject Re: mod_negotiation gif/jpeg issues
Date Sun, 21 Jul 1996 15:57:32 GMT
> On Sat, 20 Jul 1996, Roy T. Fielding wrote:
> > > What is semantically or morally so bad with the statement that "in
> > > general, all GIF's on my site are slightly less attractive than their JPG
> > > brethren"? 
> > 
> > Because that is rarely true and cannot be determined by the site
> > administrator even when it is true.  Quality of the source is always
> > a function of how the original image was created and the extent of
> > lossy conversions between its creation and the current resource -- only
> > the author can determine that.
> I guess this is a philosphical difference at this point and we'll have to
> agree to disagree.  
> > Just because Apache uses qs as a deciding factor in the negotiation
> > algorithm does not mean that qs should have a default value which is
> > different than what "quality of source" means in HTTP.  Instead, Apache
> > should be configurable as to what the "tie-breaker" function should be
> > (instead of simple ordering, which is obviously wrong) -- that is the
> > only thing that needs to be adjusted for the sake of broken Accepts.
> > 
> > Changing Apache's interpretation of a tie is allowed by the protocol;
> > changing its interpretation of what qs means is not because it would
> > lead to correctly written agents getting the wrong results.
> Okay, I disagree with the last argument, but I would be happy to
> compromise with your proposal for tie-breaking function.  Perhaps
>   TypePreferenceRanking: image/cgm,image/png,image/jpg,image/gif
>   TypePreferenceRanking: text/html-cougar,text/html,text/plain
> What this would mean is that:
> 1) image/png would be preferable to image/jpg but not to image/cgm; 
> 2) text/html is preferable to text/plain but not text/html-cougar 
> 3) there is no defined ranking between text/html and image/gif.
> It would be too bizarre, semantically, to me at least, to force all types
> into one big lineup of preferential order.
> 	Brian

I support the argument that Brian and Alexei are making.

We've been waiting a long time for the browser developers to get
it right. I think that giving this control to the server admins
would be beneficial to the community, not _just_ the admins.

Perhaps Sameer would want to crank out another press release
pointing out that we got tired of waiting on the browser developers
to get it right? :-)

View raw message