httpd-docs mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From André Malo>
Subject Re: Why x-gzip rather than gzip?
Date Wed, 12 Mar 2003 17:29:13 GMT
* Rich Bowen wrote:

>> The Apache documentation at
>> <>
>> says the following about the AddEncoding directive:
>>   "(...) you should always use x-gzip and x-compress for these two
>>    specific encodings."
>> What's the motivation for this suggestion? I think it should be dropped.
> I don't think we're at liberty to just change that. You need to talk to
> the standards people about this. It's not something that we can just
> change in the documentation and make it so.

I must miss something ;-) It's our documentation. Why do we suggest it?

>> Internet Explorer doesn't support "x-gzip", but "gzip". This is legal
>> because of its "Accept-Encoding: gzip, deflate". However, some proxy
> It seems that this is a non-complience on their part, not our Apache's

Don't agree. not-recognizing an x-token is very compliant. In contrast 
sending an x-token per default is totally uncool.

die (eval q-qq:Just Another Perl Hacker

# André Malo, <> #

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message