On Mon, Nov 22, 2004 at 11:40:29PM -0800, Roy T. Fielding wrote: > Quoting "William A. Rowe, Jr." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > >Okay, but why the next three lines? Why would Content-Encoding: gzip > > >*ever* be set on a 304? > > Because Content-* header fields in a 304 response describe > what the response entity would contain if it were a 200 response. > Therefore, the header field must be the same as it would be for > a 200. The body must be dropped by the HTTP filter.
That seems at odds with what 304 states unless I'm missing something? 10.3.5 says you MUST NOT or SHOULD NOT send any entity headers with a 304 except those explictly mentioned, which means the only Content-* header which should be sent is a Content-Length. I could interpret that paragraph to be talking only about caches, but this is exactly the logic which 1.3 and 2.0 implement as special case for a 304 response. joe
