On Mon, 2 Jul 2007, Dan Connolly wrote:
Yves,
We're discussing this "Enabling Read Access for Web Resources"
spec in a TAG telcon, and I discovered...
2.1. Content-Access-Control header
http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/WD-access-control-20070618/#content-access-control
Now as I recall, modern HTTP header fields are moving
from Transfer-Encoding: to TE: to save packets.
Can you confirm?
There is another reason to use TE: avoiding mixing the connection-level
TE/Transfer-Encoding "couple" with the Accept-[Encoding|..] /
Content-[Encoding|..]
That said, if you manage to have a shorter version of a long header while
keeping the name obvious, it will be faster to parse. In the WD cited
above, I would drop the 'Content'.
On a side note, I'm wondering why the WD states that the policy described
is only safe for GET and HEAD... no OPTIONS?
Cheers,
--
Baroula que barouleras, au tiéu toujou t'entourneras.
~~Yves
