On Fri, Nov 6, 2020 at 10:48 PM bie <bie at 202x.moe> wrote: > This reduces gemini to a simple file sharing protocol and basically says > that dynamic content is out (unless only targeting advanced clients). > Here are my assumptions. 1) Clients are going to cache, like it or not. Some already do. 2) Servers are in the best position to say whether content is dynamic or not. "Dynamic" in this case is not just CGI-generated; it's also static files that change often. (I post a static file on the Web that is recomputed every ten minutes by a cron job.) 3) If the server can communicate "don't cache this", the client can provide a better UX. Ultimately, I like the gemini protocol just the way it is (and wouldn' > be opposed to even a 1000 year feature freeze) but arbitrary caching by > clients kills a whole host of use-cases around generated and dynamic > responses. > That horse has sailed and that ship is out of the barn. "The world will go as it will, and not as you or I would have it." John Cowan http://vrici.lojban.org/~cowan cowan at ccil.org weirdo: When is R7RS coming out? Riastradh: As soon as the top is a beautiful golden brown and if you stick a toothpick in it, the toothpick comes out dry. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://lists.orbitalfox.eu/archives/gemini/attachments/20201106/b73a d739/attachment-0001.htm>
---
Previous in thread (12 of 55): 🗣️ bie (bie (a) 202x.moe)