-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 50
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
hub vs subscriber in section 8 #143
Comments
@julien51 I need your help on this one, I'm not entirely sure what this sentence is trying to describe:
|
So, basically, above, we say the the hub "must include at least one Link Header [RFC5988] with rel=hub pointing to a Hub associated with the topic being updated. It must also include one Link Header [RFC5988] with rel=self set to the canonical URL of the topic being updated. [...]. All these URLs are those resulting from the discovery process (Section 3)." Since the publisher -> relationship is not normalised, it is not obvious that the hub would perform a GET request to pull the data from the publishers (I know Google's hub does that, and I think swicthboard does too... but Superfeedr actually does not always: we also get fact pings from publishers sometimes). This means that it is the hubs's job to check that the values it probably caches for canonical URL and Hub URLs are still correct. |
Upon re-reading this section, what's the purpose of the hub sending the Link headers anyway, seeing that the same paragraph says "The subscriber MUST NOT use these Link headers to identify the subscription". |
We discussed this on today's call. We came to the conclusion that the sentence "A hub MAY use discovery from time to time..." was causing confusion because it is describing the publisher-to-hub relationship which is out of scope of the spec. We resolved to strike that sentence and replace it with a description of what it's actually trying to say. The section in the editor's draft now reads as follows:
Does this read better @mkovatsc, and @julien51 does this still match your intent of what the spec should say? |
Works for me! |
"For example, the topic URL in the content distribution request may be different from the topic URL that was originally subscribed to" for #143
"A Subscriber MAY", no?
From #127 by @mkovatsc
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: