test WICD Core 1.0 #55-#57 / gzip vs. x-gzip / WebKit bug report #16269

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
5 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

test WICD Core 1.0 #55-#57 / gzip vs. x-gzip / WebKit bug report #16269

Timur Mehrvarz

http://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16269

WebKit does support gzip encoding. However, it does not support x-gzip  
encoding.
How can I make the w3 server send "Content-Encoding: gzip" instead of  
"Content-Encoding: x-gzip"?

Timur


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: test WICD Core 1.0 #55-#57 / gzip vs. x-gzip / WebKit bug report #16269

Chris Lilley

On Sunday, December 9, 2007, 2:34:26 AM, Timur wrote:

TM> http://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16269

TM> WebKit does support gzip encoding. However, it does not support x-gzip
TM> encoding.
TM> How can I make the w3 server send "Content-Encoding: gzip" instead of
TM> "Content-Encoding: x-gzip"?

Timur: Our server should not be using x-gzip, so I have copied sysreq on this reply.

Sysreq: if there is some reason that we use the unofficial x-gzip when gzip is the correct and registered content encoding, please let us know; otherwise, please change the W3C servers to use the correct value.





--
 Chris Lilley                    mailto:[hidden email]
 Interaction Domain Leader
 Co-Chair, W3C SVG Working Group
 W3C Graphics Activity Lead
 Co-Chair, W3C Hypertext CG


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: test WICD Core 1.0 #55-#57 / gzip vs. x-gzip / WebKit bug report #16269

Timur Mehrvarz


On 10.12.2007, at 10:26, Chris Lilley wrote:

> On Sunday, December 9, 2007, 2:34:26 AM, Timur wrote:
>
> TM> WebKit does support gzip encoding. However, it does not support  
> x-gzip
> TM> encoding.
> TM> How can I make the w3 server send "Content-Encoding: gzip"  
> instead of
> TM> "Content-Encoding: x-gzip"?
>
> Timur: Our server should not be using x-gzip, so I have copied  
> sysreq on this reply.
>
> Sysreq: if there is some reason that we use the unofficial x-gzip  
> when gzip is the correct and registered content encoding, please let  
> us know; otherwise, please change the W3C servers to use the correct  
> value.

Hi sysreq. Any chance we can have "Content-Encoding: gzip" instead of  
"Content-Encoding: x-gzip" anytime soon?

The following command displays the issue:
curl -I "http://www.w3.org/2004/CDF/TestSuite/WICD_CDR_WP1/test-encoding-gzip.txt.tgz 
"

Please also take a look here: http://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16269

Thank you very much.
Timur


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[closed] Re: test WICD Core 1.0 #55-#57 / gzip vs. x-gzip / WebKit bug report #16269

Ted Guild

Timur Mehrvarz <[hidden email]> writes:
>> Timur: Our server should not be using x-gzip, so I have copied
>> sysreq on this reply.
>>
>> Sysreq: if there is some reason that we use the unofficial x-gzip
>> when gzip is the correct and registered content encoding, please let
>> us know; otherwise, please change the W3C servers to use the correct
>> value.

Apparently this is still Apache's default behavior, apparently for
"old clients."  I tried a number of clients just now including lynx
and most handle gzip fine, emacs w3 didn't but then it doesn't handle
x-gzip either.

http://httpd.apache.org/docs/2.2/mod/mod_mime.html#addencoding

It looks like someone tried to argue dropping the x-gzip default over
four years ago without much success.

http://marc.info/?l=apache-docs&m=104749017605381&w=2

> Hi sysreq. Any chance we can have "Content-Encoding: gzip" instead of
> "Content-Encoding: x-gzip" anytime soon?

Done now as there is no point in keeping the x- around since the other
is standardized, long ago at that.

Another thing I find odd with Apache here is that with this .txt.gzip
resource it that it gives the content type for the first file
extension (.txt) it comes across and not the last (.tgz).

HEAD \
http://www.w3.org/2004/CDF/TestSuite/WICD_CDR_WP1/test-encoding-gzip.txt.tgz\
|grep Content-

Content-Encoding: gzip
Content-Length: 168
Content-Type: text/plain

HEAD http://www.w3.org/People/Ted/foo.gz |grep Content-

Content-Encoding: gzip
Content-Length: 53
Content-Type: application/gzip; qs=0.001

IMHO it should give application/gzip in such cases.  We'll look into
that and follow up with Apache folks.

--
Ted Guild <[hidden email]>
W3C Systems Team
http://www.w3.org

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [closed] Re: test WICD Core 1.0 #55-#57 / gzip vs. x-gzip / WebKit bug report #16269

Timur Mehrvarz

Hi Ted.

The issue is solved. WebKit does require "Content-Encoding: gzip", but  
it also requires for the gziped text document to have a ".txt" file  
extension. ".txt" should not be required, I think, but it is the not  
the purpose of our test to verify this. Only to make sure gzip  
encoding is available (at all) in a uniform way. I have modified the  
testcase referenced below, which now works as intended in all listed  
user agents.
Thank you very much for your support.

Timur

http://www.w3.org/2004/CDF/TestSuite/WICD_CDR_WP1/wicdcore.xhtml#core55

On 23.12.2007, at 23:06, Ted Guild wrote:

> Timur Mehrvarz <[hidden email]> writes:
>>> Timur: Our server should not be using x-gzip, so I have copied
>>> sysreq on this reply.
>>>
>>> Sysreq: if there is some reason that we use the unofficial x-gzip
>>> when gzip is the correct and registered content encoding, please let
>>> us know; otherwise, please change the W3C servers to use the correct
>>> value.
>
> Apparently this is still Apache's default behavior, apparently for
> "old clients."  I tried a number of clients just now including lynx
> and most handle gzip fine, emacs w3 didn't but then it doesn't handle
> x-gzip either.
>
> http://httpd.apache.org/docs/2.2/mod/mod_mime.html#addencoding
>
> It looks like someone tried to argue dropping the x-gzip default over
> four years ago without much success.
>
> http://marc.info/?l=apache-docs&m=104749017605381&w=2
>
>> Hi sysreq. Any chance we can have "Content-Encoding: gzip" instead of
>> "Content-Encoding: x-gzip" anytime soon?
>
> Done now as there is no point in keeping the x- around since the other
> is standardized, long ago at that.
>
> Another thing I find odd with Apache here is that with this .txt.gzip
> resource it that it gives the content type for the first file
> extension (.txt) it comes across and not the last (.tgz).
>
> HEAD \
> http://www.w3.org/2004/CDF/TestSuite/WICD_CDR_WP1/test-encoding-gzip.txt.tgz 
> \
> |grep Content-
>
> Content-Encoding: gzip
> Content-Length: 168
> Content-Type: text/plain
>
> HEAD http://www.w3.org/People/Ted/foo.gz |grep Content-
>
> Content-Encoding: gzip
> Content-Length: 53
> Content-Type: application/gzip; qs=0.001
>
> IMHO it should give application/gzip in such cases.  We'll look into
> that and follow up with Apache folks.
>
> --
> Ted Guild <[hidden email]>
> W3C Systems Team
> http://www.w3.org