Re: Server Push -> Cache Push?

On 30 January 2014 10:46, Mike Belshe <mike@belshe.com> wrote:

> I think server-push is actually pretty well understood.  Those versant in
> HTTP recognize that a push to the server is also known as a "GET".
>

That's a typo for "PUT", right?

I agree that "server push" makes enough sense as it is, and "cache push"
-- while describing the only real use-case we currently have -- deters any
future uses that may evolve.  If we were going for a verb that describes
the action in a general case, it would be something like "preempt," since
semantically the server is preempting a request. (Or possibly
"anticipate.")  But who really wants to call it a "preemptive response"?

Another thing I like about "server push" is that it hints at a possible
future mechanism: "server pull."  I don't have a use for such a thing right
now, but just having the possibility looming there in the language might
trigger some clever person some day to see in it a solution to some problem
they're having.

Sorry, I tried to rewrite that last sentence a few times but I couldn't
make it more readable.

-- 
  Matthew Kerwin
  http://matthew.kerwin.net.au/