- From: Raphaël Troncy <Raphael.Troncy@cwi.nl>
- Date: Thu, 05 Mar 2009 14:44:39 +0100
- To: Media Fragment <public-media-fragment@w3.org>
Dear all, I have made my stab on the description of the 2-ways and the 4-ways handshake proposal. See http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/wiki/HTTP_implementation All comments welcome! I asked some questions (regarding the first HTTP response code in the 4-ways handshake). The pro/cons need also to be completed. In particular, I'm not sure about the cachability of the resource in both cases? If the cachability is the primary concern of the 2-ways handshake, I observe that a UA can always use the 'Pragma' header and state a no-cache value, expressing the fact he might prefer to have only one roundtrip and no cache rather than 2 roundtrips. What do you think? My main references were the excellent summary of Silvia sent a while back on this list [1] and the unvaluable help from Yves that I have bothered with 50 emails :-) It is a wiki, so now, all, modify the page at your convenience :-) Raphaël [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-media-fragment/2008Oct/0060.html -- Raphaël Troncy CWI (Centre for Mathematics and Computer Science), Science Park 123, 1098 XG Amsterdam, The Netherlands e-mail: raphael.troncy@cwi.nl & raphael.troncy@gmail.com Tel: +31 (0)20 - 592 4093 Fax: +31 (0)20 - 592 4312 Web: http://www.cwi.nl/~troncy/
Received on Thursday, 5 March 2009 13:45:24 UTC