Re: Multi-GET, extreme compression?

[Nico Williams <[e-mail]>]

On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 11:07 PM, Mark Nottingham <[e-mail]> wrote:
> On 19/02/2013, at 3:44 PM, Nico Williams <[e-mail]> wrote:
>> Is Phillip's proposal also out of charter?
>
> If it requires significant modification of HTTP APIs to function, or changes to HTML, yes.

I think neither.  Think of a header by which I ask for a tarball (or
whatever suitable archive format) with the resource and related
sub-resources?  How would such an extension require changes to HTTP
APIs or HTML?  I think it's neither.  It would require changes to the
server, but if the server doesn't grok this header no problem ensues:
the client can tell what happened because of the content type of the
result (assuming success).  To be fair the obvious way to code this on
the client would be either as a wrapper to HTTP APIs (I assume you
meant APIs to HTTP, as opposed to APIs accessed via HTTP) or as
extensions to HTTP APIs.

(And if you really meant HTTP APIs as in APIs accessed via HTTP then I
think those also would require no changes.)

>>> Again, if you have a proposal, please write it up in detail and make it to the WG; endlessly discussing the minutia of a half-formed idea is not a productive use of anyone's time.
>>
>> I... posted twice on this, within minutes.
>
> Yes, but it's not about a simple post count. It's about continuing a thread where I'd already suggested making a more well-formed proposal before continuing discussion.

Ah, my sin then was not reading the whole thread first.  Sorry.

Nico
--