I a mcreating a website that will have quite a number (one thousand or more) of moderately large but basically static HTML files (200+ kb). The website is essentially a directory, but the directory info does not change often enough to warrant dynamic generation.
So, someone mentioned GZip as a way to compress HTML files such that browsers should be able to render them without a plugin.
Most of the discussions I have seen here and elsewhere have to do with using mod_gzip to dynamically compress and send HTML/etc. to a browser. I am aware some hosts look askance at using mod_gzip because they feel it loads down their CPUs. Having done a lot of testing with on-the-fly compression and decompression I have my own feelings on the subject (NT for instance can use on-fly compression/decompression in its file system and it is almost invisible as far as its impact on CPU cycles).
However, since I would be storing my HTML files already compressed I don't see where that would affect CPU cycles unless the server had to decompress the file to send it to a non-compliant browser (which would happen only very infrequently I am sure).
Sure enough, the page would not render - it brought up a dialog to save it as a binary file instead.
So, my question is, is it necessary for the server to have mod_gzip installed and enabled for static gzip files to be properly served to a compatible browser so that it will render? Or did I not do something correctly - like set a MIME type on my server or something?
This is probably real basic stuff for web developers, but I am a desktop guy, despite my Java experience (I used to work for one of the few companies that did desktop apps in Java).