toad (Mon, Apr 30, 2001 at 12:06:02PM +0100):
> On Mon, Apr 30, 2001 at 12:50:01AM -0400, Tavin Cole wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 30, 2001 at 03:19:13AM +0100, Michael Rogers wrote:
> > > On Sun, Apr 29, 2001 at 10:45:38AM -0700, Mr.Bad wrote:
> > > > For small files, like plain text and HTML, you really don't get much
> > > > bang for your buck by compressing them, at least w/r/t on-the-wire
> > > > transfer time.
> > > 
> > > Why are text and HTML necessarily small? People might want to insert 
> > > books, HOWTOs etc as well as web pages.
> > 
> > And if they did they'd be silly not to compress them first.
> They might want them browseable. If we have an optional metadata header a la
> HTTP's Transfer-Encoding, they can be compressed and browseable.

wasn't this the original sugestion???

-- 
moritz

i wish people would like really long sigs....

_______________________________________________
Devl mailing list
Devl at freenetproject.org
http://lists.freenetproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devl
>From - Wed May  2 08:52:55 2001
Return-Path: <devl-admin at freenetproject.org>
Received: from hawk.freenetproject.org (postfix@[4.18.42.11])
        by funky.danky.com (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA23067
        for <danello at danky.com>; Mon, 30 Apr 2001 14:47:36 -0400

Reply via email to