W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > January to March 2010

Re: [DataCache] Unhandled Cases in Networking Changes

From: Nikunj R. Mehta <nikunj.mehta@oracle.com>
Date: Fri, 1 Jan 2010 10:16:42 -0800
Cc: public-webapps@w3.org
Message-Id: <192B3F92-2F22-4299-8CA1-9692BF5E5858@oracle.com>
To: Joseph Pecoraro <joepeck02@gmail.com>

On Dec 10, 2009, at 11:28 AM, Joseph Pecoraro wrote:

> - 4.3.2. Changes to the networking model
> http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/DataCache/#networking-model-changes
> There are a couple cases I expected to see in the networking changes.
> 1. There are two branches to Step 10 for off-line and online  
> handling. Both start with:
> [[
>  10.1 Select an `embedded server` server to...
> ]]
> There is nothing specified for what to do when there is no embedded  
> server for the resource. My thoughts are that since the resource was  
> captured in a DataCache specifically with this dynamicMethod  
> specified, then there _should_ be an embedded server to handle it.  
> In the case where there is no embedded server, then it seems  
> appropriate to raise an exception here.

In case no embedded server is available, the user agent fetches from  
the server. I have clarified this in the spec. This behavior makes  
most sense.

> 2. In the off-line case there is a MutableHttpResponse that gets  
> written to by the interception function. Here is one of the sub-steps:
> [[
>  10.4 Wait for the interception function to dispatch the dynamic  
> response.
> ]]
> I think this is ambiguous. When does the interception function  
> "dispatch" the response?
>  - it can explicitly dispatch by calling MutableHttpResponse.send;
>  http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/DataCache/#response-send

This is the correct way.

> However what happens if send() is not called? What happens when:
>  - the interception function exits (either by exception or naturally)

The normal network timeout logic should apply here.

> My thoughts are that this should either:
>  - implicitly dispatch
>  - raise an exception and abort to normal behavior
> I am currently siding with implicitly dispatching, which makes the  
> send() optional (and unnecessary?). Do you see any disadvantage to  
> this?

Implicitly dispatching is a problem since the interception function  
may have to wait until a time some storage operation completes.

Nikunj Mehta
Received on Friday, 1 January 2010 18:17:52 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 18:13:04 UTC