W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg-old@w3.org > May to August 1996

Re: Any interest in automatic link-updating?

From: James Marshall <jsm@crl.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Jul 1996 13:56:57 -0700 (PDT)
To: Vance Huntley <vance@webgenesis.com>
Cc: http-wg%cuckoo.hpl.hp.com@hplb.hpl.hp.com
Message-Id: <Pine.SUN.3.91.960715131743.12392A-100000@crl.crl.com>
X-Mailing-List: <http-wg@cuckoo.hpl.hp.com> archive/latest/1125
I see I wasn't very clear in my first post-- let me apply some Windex: 

Given the current HTTP standard, I don't see how to update a link the
first time any user follows it; the best method I know is for the owning
server to keep checking all links in its resources, and update those that
are obsolete.  It would be more efficient (and more immediate) to update a
link the first time someone discovers it's obsolete, instead of checking
all links periodically.  Sort of like interrupt-driven versus polling. 

If you know a way to do this with the current HTTP standard, then I'm the
one being dense (and please let me know how) (I mean how to do it, now how

The scheme I'm talking about involves adding or modifying an HTTP method
to let any client SUGGEST to a server that a link in a resource needs
updating.  The server is then expected to test the link with a HEAD
request, before actually updating the link.  This suggestion mechanism
allows anyone to notify any server that a link needs updating, while
preventing unauthorized changes (the security concern that Dave Morris (Hi
Dave!) brought up in his note). 

Does this make more sense? 

James Marshall

> I agree that updating broken links is a useful feature in a web server. 
> But why does this need to be addressed in the standard?  Is this really 
> anything more than a useful utility for webmasters  ( as opposed to a 
> client-server communication issue which must be addressed in the 
> standard )?
> Apologies in advance if I'm just being dense :-)
> ------------
> Vance Huntley
> vance@webgenesis.com --- 607.255.8499
Received on Monday, 15 July 1996 15:54:28 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:40:17 UTC