[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [syndication] shared feed lists
First let's take out the emotionally charged words, blindly, waste, clog up,
etc.
Do the math. I answered this question in the Q&A. I don't know how to answer
it again without just repeating the answer.
But let's try anyway. ;->
Assume you look for a link to the directory file in the HTML of the home
page of the site.
To find the directory, you:
1. Read the index file.
2. Look for the link element.
3. Read the directory file it points to.
In the approach I'm advocating you:
1. Read the directory file.
Now please explain why is the first approach more efficient.
Dave
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bill Kearney" <ml_yahoo@ideaspace.net>
To: <syndication@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, October 14, 2003 9:42 AM
Subject: Re: [syndication] shared feed lists
>
> Why is using a <head> section <link> tag not sufficient?
>
> Where robots.txt works, in that it's intended as a tool that something
> potentially causing TREMENDOUS amount of traffic can use as a guide, is
useful
> the same can hardly be said of an index file of this nature. The
favicon.ico
> thing is little more than just another vendor embrace and extend hack.
>
> What's 'better' resource-wise?
>
> Pull the HTML page, and from within that already obtained data detect a
link
> tag. Pull the contents referenced by that link tag.
>
> or
>
> Blindly request a link not knowing if it exists or not, waste the
bandwidth and
> clog up server error log?
>
> Couple the latter with the horrendously back practices of too-frequent
> scheduling and you've got a real potential for problems.
>
> I, and others, have long thought it's better to make informed requests
instead
> of blindly stabbing around looking for data that's not ever going to be
present.
> The only question becomes agreeing on what attribute value to use for the
link
> tag.
>
> So, with as much respect as you're due, explain why the latter (blind
> requesting) is 'better'.
>
> -Bill Kearney
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Dave Winer" <dave@userland.com>
> To: <syndication@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, October 14, 2003 9:21 AM
> Subject: Re: [syndication] RFC: myPublicFeeds.opml
>
>
> > With all due respect, you still haven't provided either a reason not to
do
> > it this way, or a realistic alternative.
> >
> > Dave
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>