On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 1:02 PM, Adrian Bateman <adria...@microsoft.com> wrote: > For platform features that directly affect web developers' pages that might > sometimes be true. However, compression is also optional in HTTP and it > doesn't appear to have caused problems or made some sites work and others > not based on some dominant implementation.
Do you think it would be feasible in practice for a mainstream web browser to not support HTTP compression? For instance, if Internet Explorer removed support for it, would you expect to get a sufficient number of bug reports that you'd be forced to re-add support? If so, then HTTP compression is in practice mandatory for web browsers, but optional for web servers. This is exactly the state of affairs proposed for WebSockets compression.