Re: An MGET proposal for HTTP
Tony Sanders (sanders@bsdi.com)
Mon, 31 Oct 1994 12:03:22 -0600
ts writes:
> > If you take the view that they don't, then the optimisation that Guy speaks
> > of is reasonable. Although what his scripts do with, say
...
> Actually this script check only "image/gif" and send a clickable map
> (ISMAP). It don't check "*/*" (or "*") because all browsers (I think) send
> this Accept type and I don't want send a GIF image to see the magic word
> "<IMAGE>" and can't use it.
This "optimisation" may happen to work now but I think it is the wrong
approach for the long run. Maybe we need clients to send something like:
Accept: text/html, text/plain, image/gif; img
So that servers could make better presentation choices
for ISMAP/Spacejump images.
Sounds yucky to me, just thinking out loud.