httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Roy T. Fielding" <field...@liege.ICS.UCI.EDU>
Subject Re: Negotiation updates, and transparent neg.
Date Wed, 21 Aug 1996 07:19:47 GMT
> Netscape 2.0 and 3.0 send:
> 
> Accept: image/gif, image/x-xbitmap, image/jpeg, image/pjpeg, */*
> 
>> on a normal request because their *&*%^$%#$^ program is too lazy
>> to do a merge.
> 
> What do you mean by this? A merge of what?

A merge of any explicit type into */* if both are present with the
same quality.  Netscape does not prefer those image types on a normal
request -- it just lists them because a different part of their software
generates that part of the Accept header.

>> The problem is that if a given resource is available as both
>> text/html and image/jpeg (as might be the case for a magazine cover),
>> then inventing a low q value for */* means that the user will get
>> the image/jpeg version even if the text/html has a much higher qs.
>> I'm sure that RST mentioned this to me last year at MIT.
> 
> Even so, this case is far less likely than the case of, for example,
> image/jpeg and image/png, with the PNG having a higher qs value than the
> JPEG. See, Netscape can handle HTML, and it can handle JPEG. It can't
> handle PNG. I'd rather see a scheme that gives a browser *something*, of
> possibly lesser quality, that it can handle inline, instead of giving it
> something of high quality that it can only save to disk.

I'd rather have something that represents what the browser actually wants.
If it shows a list of specific image types, why not just assume

    image/*;q=0.001

since that will result in all other image formats receiving an extremely
small quality and not affect the other half of the browser that actually
prefers text/html over anything else.

.....Roy

Mime
View raw message