[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: How could RDDL be distributed ?
- From: Miles Sabin <MSabin@interx.com>
- To: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2001 16:53:06 +0000
Tim Bray wrote,
> Miles Sabin wrote:
> > Actually I think it's simply two different problems which
> > might have related solutions,
> > 1. Allow for local overriding of authoritative resources.
> > 2. Allow for distribution and replication of authoritative
> > resources.
> Neither of which are specific to RDDL. I assume everyone
> agrees with this. In the general case, these are just
> consequences of dealing with URIs, n'est-ce pas? -T
Agreed that it's not specific to RDDL. And probably everyone
agrees on that.
But this isn't the general URI case. We have a very specific
looming issue (that's my hunch anyway) of large chunks of web
infrastructure depending (perhaps unwisely) on being able to
retrieve resources on the ends of particular well-known URIs on
a regular basis ... a lot of them hosted by the W3C, a lot of
them hosted elsewhere. I predict server meltdown.
You could argue that people who build XML applications
_shouldn't_ fetch a fresh copy of the corresponding XML
DTD/Schema every time they parse a fresh document instance. And
you'd be right, but that won't stop people doing it.
That's my justification for a new protocol. But I think that
there's also a very close connection with some of the areas we've
been discussing here wrt, RDDL and xmlcatalog. Both allow for
local overriding via what is to all intents and purposes a
local cache. I suggest we at least look at whether there's
enough similarity between the two scenarios to make it worth
coming up with a uniform solution.
Miles Sabin InterX
Internet Systems Architect 5/6 Glenthorne Mews
+44 (0)20 8817 4030 London, W6 0LJ, England