At 10.56 -0400 99-07-27, Mark Horton wrote:
Is there an RFC (or movement toward one) for a compressed encoding
HTTP has compression headers. We should find out if and how much they
are used, and why. HTTP needs compression even more than e-mail,
because people are waiting for documents to show up in real time. If
compression has not been successful in HTTP, will it be in e-mail
where the need is less than in HTTP?
--- --- Excerpts from the HTTP/1.1 specification, RFC 2616 --- ---
content-coding = token
All content-coding values are case-insensitive. HTTP/1.1 uses
content-coding values in the Accept-Encoding (section 14.3) and
Content-Encoding (section 14.11) header fields. Although the value
describes the content-coding, what is more important is that it
indicates what decoding mechanism will be required to remove the
The Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) acts as a registry for
content-coding value tokens. Initially, the registry contains the
gzip An encoding format produced by the file compression program
"gzip" (GNU zip) as described in RFC 1952 . This format is a
Lempel-Ziv coding (LZ77) with a 32 bit CRC.
The encoding format produced by the common UNIX file compression
program "compress". This format is an adaptive Lempel-Ziv-Welch
Use of program names for the identification of encoding formats
is not desirable and is discouraged for future encodings. Their
use here is representative of historical practice, not good
design. For compatibility with previous implementations of HTTP,
applications SHOULD consider "x-gzip" and "x-compress" to be
equivalent to "gzip" and "compress" respectively.
The "zlib" format defined in RFC 1950  in combination with
the "deflate" compression mechanism described in RFC 1951 .
The default (identity) encoding; the use of no transformation
whatsoever. This content-coding is used only in the Accept-
Encoding header, and SHOULD NOT be used in the Content-Encoding
New content-coding value tokens SHOULD be registered; to allow
interoperability between clients and servers, specifications of the
content coding algorithms needed to implement a new value SHOULD be
publicly available and adequate for independent implementation, and
conform to the purpose of content coding defined in this section.
Jacob Palme <jpalme(_at_)dsv(_dot_)su(_dot_)se> (Stockholm University and KTH)
for more info see URL: http://www.dsv.su.se/~jpalme