Re: Feed History -02

2005-08-10 Thread Mark Nottingham
So, you're really looking for entry-level, time-based invalidation, no? I guess the simplest way to do this would be to dereference the link and see if you get a 404/410; if you do, you know it's no longer good. That's not terribly efficient, but OTOH managing metadata in multiple places i

Re: Expires extension draft (was Re: Feed History -02)

2005-08-10 Thread Walter Underwood
--On August 10, 2005 1:56:05 PM +1000 Eric Scheid <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Aside: a perfect example of what sense of 'expires' is in the I-D itself... > > Network Working Group > Internet-Draft > Expires: January 2, 2006 Especially perfect because the HTTP header does not reflec

Re: Expires extension draft (was Re: Feed History -02)

2005-08-10 Thread James M Snell
This is precisely why the expires/max-age needs to operate strictly on the entry level. The expires/max-age elements may appear on the feed level but it actually only applies to the entries within that feed. Going back and reading my draft, I see that I screwed up and didn't indicate that p

Re: Expires extension draft (was Re: Feed History -02)

2005-08-09 Thread Henry Story
There is an interesting problem of how this interacts with the history tag. If you set an a feed ... then what are you setting it on? Well not the document, clearly, as you have pointed out since HTTP headers deal with that. So it must be on the feed. And of course a feed is

Re: Expires extension draft (was Re: Feed History -02)

2005-08-09 Thread James M Snell
Eric Scheid wrote: On 10/8/05 12:46 PM, "James M Snell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: This is fairly quick and off-the-cuff, but here's an initial draft to get the ball rolling.. http://www.snellspace.com/public/draft-snell-atompub-feed-expires.txt Looks good, I think it does need a

Re: Feed History -02

2005-08-09 Thread James M Snell
First off, let me stress that I am NOT talking about caching scenarios here... (my use of the terms "application layer" and "transport layer" were an unfortunate mistake on my part that only served to confuse my point) Let's get away from the multiprotocol question for a bit (it never leads

Re: Expires extension draft (was Re: Feed History -02)

2005-08-09 Thread Eric Scheid
On 10/8/05 12:46 PM, "James M Snell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > This is fairly quick and off-the-cuff, but here's an initial draft to > get the ball rolling.. > > http://www.snellspace.com/public/draft-snell-atompub-feed-expires.txt > Looks good, I think it does need a little bit of prose ex

Re: Feed History -02

2005-08-09 Thread Mark Nottingham
HTTP isn't a transport protocol, it's a transfer protocol; i.e., the caching information (and other entity metadata) are *part of* the entity, not something that's conceptually separate. The problem with having an "abstract" or "transport-neutral" concept of caching is that it leaves you

Expires extension draft (was Re: Feed History -02)

2005-08-09 Thread James M Snell
This is fairly quick and off-the-cuff, but here's an initial draft to get the ball rolling.. http://www.snellspace.com/public/draft-snell-atompub-feed-expires.txt - James Henry Story wrote: To answer my own question [[ Interesting... but why have a limit of one year? For archives, I wo

Re: Feed History -02

2005-08-09 Thread Mark Nottingham
On 09/08/2005, at 4:07 AM, Henry Story wrote: But I would really like some way to specify that the next feed document is an archive (ie. won't change). This would make it easy for clients to know when to stop following the links, ie, when they have cought up with the changes since they l

Re: Feed History -02

2005-08-09 Thread James M Snell
Henry Story wrote: Now I am wondering if the http mechanism is perhaps all that is needed for what I want with the unchanging archives. If it is then perhaps this could be explained in the Feed History RFC. Or are there other reasons to add and "expires" tag to the document itself? On the

Re: Feed History -02

2005-08-09 Thread Henry Story
To answer my own question [[ Interesting... but why have a limit of one year? For archives, I would like a limit of forever. ]] I found the following in the HTTP spec [[ To mark a response as "never expires," an origin server sends an Expires date approximately one year from the time

Re: Feed History -02

2005-08-09 Thread James M Snell
Walter Underwood wrote: --On August 9, 2005 9:28:52 AM -0700 James M Snell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I made some proposals for cache control info (expires and max-age). That might work for this. I missed these proposals. I've been giving some thought to an and extension mysel

Re: Feed History -02

2005-08-09 Thread Henry Story
On 9 Aug 2005, at 18:32, Walter Underwood wrote: --On August 9, 2005 9:28:52 AM -0700 James M Snell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I made some proposals for cache control info (expires and max-age). That might work for this. I missed these proposals. I've been giving some thought to an and

Re: Feed History -02

2005-08-09 Thread Walter Underwood
--On August 9, 2005 9:28:52 AM -0700 James M Snell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> I made some proposals for cache control info (expires and max-age). >> That might work for this. >> > I missed these proposals. I've been giving some thought to an > and extension myself and was getting ready to

Re: Feed History -02

2005-08-09 Thread James M Snell
Walter Underwood wrote: --On August 9, 2005 1:07:29 PM +0200 Henry Story <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: But I would really like some way to specify that the next feed document is an archive (ie. won't change). This would make it easy for clients to know when to stop following the links, ie, w

Re: Feed History -02

2005-08-09 Thread Walter Underwood
--On August 9, 2005 1:07:29 PM +0200 Henry Story <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > But I would really like some way to specify that the next feed document is an > archive (ie. won't change). This would make it easy for clients to know when > to stop following the links, ie, when they have cought up

Re: Feed History -02

2005-08-09 Thread Henry Story
On 4 Aug 2005, at 06:27, Mark Nottingham wrote: So, if I read you correctly, it sounds like you have a method whereby a 'top20' feed wouldn't need history:prev to give the kind of history that you're thinking of, right? If that's the case, I'm tempted to just tweak the draft so that hist

Re: nested feeds (was: Feed History -02)

2005-08-09 Thread Henry Story
Sorry for taking so long to reply. I have been off on a 700km cycle trip http://blogs.sun.com/roller/page/bblfish/20050807 I don't really want to spend to much time on the top-X discussion, as I am a lot more interested in the feed history itself, but here are some thoughts anyway... On 2

Re: Feed History -02

2005-08-03 Thread Mark Nottingham
So, if I read you correctly, it sounds like you have a method whereby a 'top20' feed wouldn't need history:prev to give the kind of history that you're thinking of, right? If that's the case, I'm tempted to just tweak the draft so that history:stateful is optional if history:prev is prese

Re: nested feeds (was: Feed History -02)

2005-07-29 Thread Eric Scheid
On 29/7/05 11:39 PM, "Henry Story" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Below I think I have worked out how one can in fact have a top20 feed, and I > show how this can be combined without trouble with the > link... > > > On 29 Jul 2005, at 13:12, Eric Scheid wrote: > >> On 29/7/05 7:57 PM, "Henry

Re: Feed History -02

2005-07-29 Thread Henry Story
Below I think I have worked out how one can in fact have a top20 feed, and I show how this can be combined without trouble with the link... On 29 Jul 2005, at 13:12, Eric Scheid wrote: On 29/7/05 7:57 PM, "Henry Story" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: 1- The top 20 list: here one wants to m

Re: Feed History -02

2005-07-29 Thread Eric Scheid
On 29/7/05 9:12 PM, "Eric Scheid" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > It's conceivable they could also provide a feed for each publication > pointing to the table of contents feeds of each issue. That is, a feed with > an entry for each issue. There is another issue with the idea individual Atom Feed D

Re: Feed History -02

2005-07-29 Thread Eric Scheid
On 29/7/05 7:57 PM, "Henry Story" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > 1- The top 20 list: here one wants to move to the previous top 20 list and > think of them as one thing. The link to the next feed is not meant to be > additive. Each feed is to be seen as a whole. I have a little trouble still > thi

Re: Feed History -02

2005-07-29 Thread Henry Story
I get the feeling that we should perhaps first list the main types of history archives, and then deal with each one separately. I can see 3: 1- The top 20 list: here one wants to move to the previous top 20 list and think of them as one thing. The link to the next feed is not mea

Re: Feed History -02

2005-07-24 Thread Dave Pawson
On Sat, 2005-07-23 at 09:14 -0700, Mark Nottingham wrote: > > Archives *should not* change. I think any librarian will agree with > > that. > > I very much agree that this is the ideal that should be striven for. > The underlying problem, I think, is that different feeds have > different s

Re: Feed History -02

2005-07-23 Thread Mark Nottingham
On 19/07/2005, at 2:04 AM, Henry Story wrote: Clearly the archive feed will work best if archive documents, once completed (containing a given number of entries) never change. Readers of the archive will have a simple way to know when to stop reading: there should never be a need to re-read

Re: Feed History -02

2005-07-22 Thread Stefan Eissing
Am 21.07.2005 um 16:13 schrieb Mark Nottingham: On 19/07/2005, at 1:48 AM, Stefan Eissing wrote: [...] I have the feeling that clients will need to protect themselves from servers with almost infinite histories. So a client will probably offer a XX days into the past, max NN entries setti

Re: Feed History -02

2005-07-21 Thread Mark Nottingham
On 19/07/2005, at 1:48 AM, Stefan Eissing wrote: Let's say CNN goes stateful, how would a client handle a history which soon consists of thousands of entries. How would a server best offer such a history to avoid clients retrieving it over and over again. Probably nobody has a good idea

Re: Feed History -02

2005-07-19 Thread Antone Roundy
On Tuesday, July 19, 2005, at 12:29 PM, Antone Roundy wrote: On Monday, July 18, 2005, at 01:59 AM, Stefan Eissing wrote: Ch 3. fh:stateful seems to be only needed for a newborn stateful feed. As an alternative one could drop fh:stateful and define that an empty fh:prev (refering to itself)

Re: Feed History -02

2005-07-19 Thread Antone Roundy
On Monday, July 18, 2005, at 01:59 AM, Stefan Eissing wrote: Ch 3. fh:stateful seems to be only needed for a newborn stateful feed. As an alternative one could drop fh:stateful and define that an empty fh:prev (refering to itself) is the last document in a stateful feed. That would eliminate

Re: Feed History -02

2005-07-19 Thread Henry Story
On 19 Jul 2005, at 01:52, A. Pagaltzis wrote: * Mark Nottingham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-07-18 23:30]: This is one of the unanswered questions that I left out of scope. The consumer can examine the previous archive's URI and decide as to whether it's seen it or not before, and therefore a

Re: Feed History -02

2005-07-19 Thread Henry Story
On 18 Jul 2005, at 23:21, Mark Nottingham wrote: On 18/07/2005, at 2:17 PM, Stefan Eissing wrote: On a more semantic issue: The described sync algorithm will work. In most scenarios the abort condition (e.g. all items on a historical feed are known) will also do the job. However this sti

Re: Feed History -02

2005-07-19 Thread Stefan Eissing
Am 18.07.2005 um 23:21 schrieb Mark Nottingham: On 18/07/2005, at 2:17 PM, Stefan Eissing wrote: On a more semantic issue: The described sync algorithm will work. In most scenarios the abort condition (e.g. all items on a historical feed are known) will also do the job. However this still

Re: Feed History -02

2005-07-18 Thread A. Pagaltzis
* Mark Nottingham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-07-18 23:30]: > This is one of the unanswered questions that I left out of > scope. The consumer can examine the previous archive's URI and > decide as to whether it's seen it or not before, and therefore > avoid fetching it if it already has seen it.

Re: Feed History -02

2005-07-18 Thread James M Snell
Heh... the same questions could be asked about a lot of stuff embedded in RSS but that's not the issue ;-) ... fh:prev works fine. There really isn't a strong argument in favor of link. I have my own personal preferences but those are actually quite irrelevant :-)I'll still maintain tha

Re: Feed History -02

2005-07-18 Thread Stefan Eissing
Am 18.07.2005 um 18:59 schrieb James M Snell: Mark Nottingham wrote: On 18/07/2005, at 11:10 AM, James M Snell wrote: Ch 3. fh:stateful seems to be only needed for a newborn stateful feed. As an alternative one could drop fh:stateful and define that an empty fh:prev (refering to it

Re: Feed History -02

2005-07-18 Thread Mark Nottingham
Not a problem, as such, but I don't see any benefit to reuse. It also begs the question of what an atom element in a non-Atom document means, how it's processed, etc. On 18/07/2005, at 1:03 PM, James M Snell wrote: There is precedence for using atom:link in RSS feeds. see http:// feeds.

Re: Feed History -02

2005-07-18 Thread Mark Nottingham
On 18/07/2005, at 1:29 PM, Stefan Eissing wrote: I agree that "special" URIs are not that great either. Another idea might be nested elements: stateful feed: http://example.org/thingie1.1fh:prev> stateful initial feed: stateless feed: Hmm. My thinking was that allowing stateful to be

Re: Feed History -02

2005-07-18 Thread Stefan Eissing
Am 18.07.2005 um 19:33 schrieb Mark Nottingham: On 18/07/2005, at 1:29 PM, Stefan Eissing wrote: I agree that "special" URIs are not that great either. Another idea might be nested elements: stateful feed: http://example.org/thingie1.1history> stateful initial feed: stateless feed:

Re: Feed History -02

2005-07-18 Thread Stefan Eissing
On a more semantic issue: The described sync algorithm will work. In most scenarios the abort condition (e.g. all items on a historical feed are known) will also do the job. However this still means that clients need to check the first fh:prev document if they know all entries there - if my u

Re: Feed History -02

2005-07-18 Thread Mark Nottingham
On 18/07/2005, at 2:17 PM, Stefan Eissing wrote: On a more semantic issue: The described sync algorithm will work. In most scenarios the abort condition (e.g. all items on a historical feed are known) will also do the job. However this still means that clients need to check the first fh

Re: Feed History -02

2005-07-18 Thread James M Snell
There is precedence for using atom:link in RSS feeds. see http://feeds.feedburner.com/ITConversations-EverythingMP3. I really don't think it's a problem. Mark Nottingham wrote: That's what I originally did, but I have a rather strong preference to make a single syntax work in RSS and A

Re: Feed History -02

2005-07-18 Thread James M Snell
Mark Nottingham wrote: On 18/07/2005, at 11:10 AM, James M Snell wrote: Ch 3. fh:stateful seems to be only needed for a newborn stateful feed. As an alternative one could drop fh:stateful and define that an empty fh:prev (refering to itself) is the last document in a stateful feed. T

Re: Feed History -02

2005-07-18 Thread Mark Nottingham
That's what I originally did, but I have a rather strong preference to make a single syntax work in RSS and Atom. atom:link is (naturally) specific to Atom, and people will balk at using the atom namespace in RSS feeds. That's not to say that every Atom extension should be usable in RSS,

Re: Feed History -02

2005-07-18 Thread Mark Nottingham
On 18/07/2005, at 11:10 AM, James M Snell wrote: Ch 3. fh:stateful seems to be only needed for a newborn stateful feed. As an alternative one could drop fh:stateful and define that an empty fh:prev (refering to itself) is the last document in a stateful feed. That would eliminate the ca

Re: Feed History -02

2005-07-18 Thread James M Snell
Henry Story wrote: Sorry I did not participate in the previous discussion for format 00. I only just realized this was going on. What is clear is that this is really needed! I agree with Stefan Eissing's random thought that it may not be a good idea to use Atom for a "top 10" feed. Atom

Re: Feed History -02

2005-07-18 Thread Henry Story
: The Feed History draft has been updated to -02; http://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-nottingham-atompub- feed-history-02.txt The most noticeable change in this version is the inclusion of a namespace URI, to allow implementation. I don't intend to update it for a while, so as

Re: Feed History -02

2005-07-18 Thread James M Snell
Stefan Eissing wrote: Am 16.07.2005 um 17:57 schrieb Mark Nottingham: The Feed History draft has been updated to -02; http://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-nottingham-atompub-feed- history-02.txt The most noticeable change in this version is the inclusion of a namespace URI, to

Re: Feed History -02

2005-07-18 Thread Stefan Eissing
Am 16.07.2005 um 17:57 schrieb Mark Nottingham: The Feed History draft has been updated to -02; http://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-nottingham-atompub-feed- history-02.txt The most noticeable change in this version is the inclusion of a namespace URI, to allow implementation

Feed History -02

2005-07-16 Thread Mark Nottingham
The Feed History draft has been updated to -02; http://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-nottingham-atompub-feed- history-02.txt The most noticeable change in this version is the inclusion of a namespace URI, to allow implementation. I don't intend to update it for a while, so