- From: Robert O'Callahan <robert@ocallahan.org>
- Date: Sun, 19 Sep 2010 16:33:52 -0400
2010/9/19 Julian Reschke <julian.reschke at gmx.de> > So it's a workaround that causes a performance optimization. It wouldn't be > necessary if the linked resource would have the right caching information in > the first place I think you're misunderstanding the proposal. If present for an http uri, these tags represent an assertion about the > current cache status of the target resource. A browser that has a cached > resource for that uri with the same etags and/or last-modified may present > the link data without validation in connection with the link retrieval. > So for example, page A links to resource B. The browser does a GET on A, and receives a document containing a <link> to B, and the <link> element has etags or last-modified attributes. The browser has a cached resource for B, whose etags/last-modified matches the <link> attribute, so the browser knows its cached B is valid and no further network transactions are required. The linked resource B "having the right caching information in the first place" (when the browser first fetched it) isn't enough to eliminate the need for an HTTP transaction to validate B later. Rob -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.whatwg.org/pipermail/whatwg-whatwg.org/attachments/20100919/fb78a92f/attachment.htm>
Received on Sunday, 19 September 2010 13:33:52 UTC