Re: Compression Dictionary follow-up from IETF 119

[Noam Helfman <[e-mail]>]

> "2 - Questions about the use case for hex-encoded dictionary hashes."

I’ve been dedicating a considerable amount of time to incorporate compression dictionaries into our workflow. I must express that it’s rather challenging to utilize the encoded sf-binary format of the hash in the header.
The hex hash string is prevalent and is employed in various instances during troubleshooting. This includes the file path, SRI attributes, file name, dictionary page in Chrome, among others. Given that the sf-binary is encoded as base64, which isn’t a valid URL/filename, it necessitates frequent re-encoding to be functional. Furthermore, when the multi-encoded value needs to be cross-checked for accuracy against another resource, which is a standard hex string, I find myself constantly removing the colons and decoding it for swift visual inspection or analysis.
While it’s accurate that sha-256 is a byte array, the hex string representation of sha-256 has become the universally accepted method of handling this type of data. Therefore, I strongly advocate for maintaining this approach.