- From: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 8 Apr 2011 03:16:14 +0200
- To: Noah Mendelsohn <nrm@arcanedomain.com>
- CC: "Henry S. Thompson" <ht@inf.ed.ac.uk>, Jeni Tennison <jeni@jenitennison.com>, Dan Appelquist <Daniel.Appelquist@vodafone.com>, "www-tag@w3.org" <www-tag@w3.org>
On Thursday, April 7, 2011, 7:32:06 PM, Noah wrote: NM> On 3/31/2011 1:51 PM, Henry S. Thompson wrote: >> *cache*: to store a copy of something hosted elsewhere and >> likewise make it available NM> I feel like this is missing something along the lines of: NM> *cache*: to store a copy of something hosted elsewhere and likewise make it NM> available. Cached copies are typically created to improve performance or NM> availability, and are usually not managed for long-term stability. It also seems to be missing the distinction that a cached copy is the same resource; the URI does not change, there just happens to be a copy stored along the network path. A cached copy thus differs from a copy which is served from a different URI (which may be an out of date snapshot, either inadvertently or deliberately, such as with the wayback machine). NM> I don't love that, but I feel your original definition misses the point of NM> a cached copy: it's typically an optimization, and crucially, nothing in NM> the system should behave differently if that copy disappears, except for NM> perhaps being slower or less able to respond in the face of network partition. NM> Noah -- Chris Lilley Technical Director, Interaction Domain W3C Graphics Activity Lead, Fonts Activity Lead Co-Chair, W3C Hypertext CG Member, CSS, WebFonts, SVG Working Groups
Received on Friday, 8 April 2011 01:18:21 UTC