RE: [xri] XRD feedback from Scott

[Eran Hammer-Lahav <eran@hueniverse.com>]

I agree.

We should simply state that clients should pay attention to the caching rules of the transport being used. At the same time we should clearly explain what <Expires> means and how to use it. I would leave it up to each client to decide how to handle both present.

EHL

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Scott Cantor [mailto:cantor.2@osu.edu]
> Sent: Thursday, May 28, 2009 8:54 AM
> To: 'XRI TC'
> Subject: RE: [xri] XRD feedback from Scott
> 
> Eran Hammer-Lahav wrote on 2009-05-28:
> > I am not sure how much we need to spell out the relation between the
> > transport caching directives to the document's expiration directives.
> While
> > they are used pretty much the same way, they have slightly different
> > semantic meanings. In practice, if used over HTTP, the way the spec
> is
> > written today is how it should be implemented (the earliest
> expiration
> date
> > of the two). Otherwise you violate either HTTP or XRD (or both).
> 
> It's true that caching policies are not the same as "validity" rules.
> In
> other words, I think I would agree that they aren't semantically the
> same,
> unless the XRD element is meant solely as a caching hint. So, no, I
> wouldn't
> agree that you should just use the earliest for *validity* purposes. As
> an
> example, if I get one that the HTTP layer says should be refetched, but
> is
> still valid according to the XRD itself and I can't connect to the
> source
> again to refresh it, should I rely on it?
> 
> -- Scott
> 
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
> generates this mail.  Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at:
> https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php