- From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2011 09:51:53 +1100
- To: Mike Kelly <mikekelly321@gmail.com>
- Cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>, REST-Discuss Discussion Group <rest-discuss@yahoogroups.com>
I'm a little uncomfortable calling this "negotiation"; the model I have in mind is that a site might request a larger allocation than the default, and the UA would ask the user (or possibly, the user would pre-configure to accept or deny). Wherever possible, though, the browser should probably use a heuristic, to keep it simple (From a UX perspective). Cheers, On 15/12/2011, at 9:38 AM, Mike Kelly wrote: > Nice one thanks Mark, +1 to all of that post > > What do you think about handling the negotiation via HTTP? > > Cheers, > Mike > > On Wed, Dec 14, 2011 at 10:25 PM, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> wrote: >> Some thoughts along vaguely similar lines - >> >> http://www.mnot.net/blog/2011/08/28/better_browser_caching >> >> Cheers, >> >> >> On 15/12/2011, at 7:16 AM, Mike Kelly wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> Is anyone aware of any proposals that extend HTTP to allow servers and >>> clients to negotiate client-side storage allocation for client-side >>> (private) caches? >>> >>> Basically, I'm looking for a way for a server to indicate how much >>> storage should be allocated for caching responses from a particular >>> domain name, and possibly also for the client to be able to indicate >>> how much allocation was actually possible. >>> >>> Aside from that, if you have any thoughts on whether or not this is >>> really feasible or is just a plain bad idea - please let me know >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Mike >>> >> >> -- >> Mark Nottingham >> http://www.mnot.net/ >> >> >> >> -- Mark Nottingham http://www.mnot.net/
Received on Wednesday, 14 December 2011 22:54:40 UTC