> You wouldn't be getting much pushback if you simply justified it as "It's what I want to do" Actually, if you look at the top level comments that I've made,

> You wouldn't be getting much pushback if you simply justified it as "It's what I want to do" Actually, if you look at the top level comments that I've made, that's exactly what I said. What I'm getting in response to that is that I'm basically 'breaking the web' because I don't want to comply with sniffing request headers and offering gzip to Apple WebKit users. If I don't care about supporting your web browser, then I don't care about supporting your web browser. You can't make me. > Also, it should be noted that there is a valid reason to eschew compression for HTTPS on the client side, and that's security. Compression of HTTPS channels opens up the possibility for a few more forms of attack on the encrypted data. That kind of security isn't a concern to me. Not having compression at all would take a larger toll on my bandwidth, and increase latency of page delivery. Bandwidth isn't free.