Subject:
|
Re: POST vs. GET (was: Re: IGNORE: yet another test message)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.general
|
Date:
|
Thu, 6 Apr 2000 01:49:25 GMT
|
Reply-To:
|
MATTDM@MATTDMstopspammers.ORG
|
Viewed:
|
676 times
|
| |
|
|
Todd Lehman <lehman@javanet.com> wrote:
> Have a look at HTTP::Request::Common... If you have a file of spooled-up
> outgoing ratings to submit periodically, i.e.
Yeah, I meant for actually posting in a message as a link. (Something I'm
sure you really would prefer people not do, so disabling GET requests is a
great idea.)
> I want to provide ultimately is a thing where a client can say, "Show me all
> the new ratings since some epoch time, and the server would spit back a list
> of all changepoints that occurred on or after that timestamp. Then it would
> also include a timestamp at the end, so the client new what timestamp to pass
> the next time. This would be better for both the client and the server than
> having the client poll individual messages for new ratings periodically (which
> would be very bad).
I can see that for polling, but what about the first time you're querying
for info? (When you load a newsgroup, for example.) I certainly wouldn't
want to have to start off with "Tell me about all articles ever posted to
LugNET" when all I want is info about one group.
It'd definitely be cool to be able to get ranges all at once, but why
timestamp rather than message number?
How important is periodic polling? It seems non-essential to me -- I'd get
the info when I go into a newsgroup, and not care about changes after that.
(In fact, I think it might be a pain to implement otherwise in existing
newsreaders.)
--
Matthew Miller ---> mattdm@mattdm.org
Quotes 'R' Us ---> http://quotes-r-us.org/
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
29 Messages in This Thread:
  
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
