- From: Qebui Nehebkau <qebui.nehebkau+whatwg@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2014 19:39:29 +0000
- To: Tingan Ho <tingan87@gmail.com>
- Cc: WHATWG <whatwg@lists.whatwg.org>
On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 6:57 AM, Tingan Ho <tingan87@gmail.com> wrote: > Thought and feedback is welcomed Surely it would be better to send an archive file containing the resources the server expects the client to need, employing the Accept header to decide whether to do so (ie, in order to request only the lone file without whatever else the server feels should go along, the client should exclude archives from the acceptable types), &c.? I suppose it is possible that some intermediate caches may handle this poorly, but, if so, that's fundamentally just bad design on the part of those caches; I really think we just have to accept it and do the sensible thing anyway. (Ideally, by the way, we would bake cache expiration and any other relevant response header metadata into the archive format. Of course, this puts the onus on the browser to decide whether to send a separate request for a particular resource in case it has changed, not on the server to know and supply the new version - but I think this is a better way to do things, personally.)
Received on Thursday, 13 March 2014 19:40:14 UTC