On Sat, Aug 31, 2002 at 12:42:07PM -0500, Ed Onken wrote:
> I agree and would like to ask to clarify one thing that Greg proposed and
> add another idea and propose a workaround for the whole issue of human
> readable dates:
>
> Is the new HTL in idea #2 incremented from the previous HTL? Only for
> DNF's? I assume most people have 15 for their default fproxy HTL.
>
> This may be a big deal, but maybe not too big since FProxy already rewrites
> the HREF's of links anyway... Could however this human readable date stuff
> ends up working also apply it to each link on a page that came from a
> DBR'ed FreenetURI? So if I go back to let's say, the 2002-08-29 edition of
> TFE, that if I click on the link for CofE, then it will take me to the
> edition of CofE that goes with the same time as the edition of TFE that I
> was reading?
>
> A hackish/kludgish idea for human-readable "DBR's" would be just to have
> the freesite inserter and/or his tools insert a SSK that has a human
> readable date in it like maybe SSK at blah/2002-08-29-TFE or some such. It
We already have working human readable DBRs. For example,
http://127.0.0.1:8888/SSK at rBjVda8pC-Kq04jUurIAb8IzAGcPAgM/TFE//?date=20020822
> ain't elagant, and it ain't a DBR, but it would work and work now without
> any changes to anything except the freesite insertion tools. Heck, an
> ambitious freesite inserter could write up his own metadata to do this and
> insert it with any Freenet insert client and not even wait for a tool
> change. The benefit of doing this is that it wouldn't work just in Fproxy
> but in every client. If only people could agree on a format for doing
> this. Doing that would my request above impossible, but that's OK.
Ewwwwwww.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL:
<https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20020831/d83b70de/attachment.pgp>
