Skip to content
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

Open
aaronpk opened this issue Oct 25, 2017 · 5 comments
Open

hub vs subscriber in section 8 #143

aaronpk opened this issue Oct 25, 2017 · 5 comments

Comments

@aaronpk
Copy link
Member

aaronpk commented Oct 25, 2017

8: "A hub MAY use discovery from time to time to detect changes in a topic's canonical URL"

"A Subscriber MAY", no?


From #127 by @mkovatsc

@aaronpk
Copy link
Member Author

aaronpk commented Nov 16, 2017

@julien51 I need your help on this one, I'm not entirely sure what this sentence is trying to describe:

A hub MAY use discovery from time to time to detect changes in a topic's canonical URL and Hub URLs. Any such changes will cause changes to the Link headers sent in subsequent content distribution requests.

https://www.w3.org/TR/websub/#content-distribution

@julien51
Copy link
Collaborator

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.

@aaronpk
Copy link
Member Author

aaronpk commented Nov 21, 2017

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".

@aaronpk
Copy link
Member Author

aaronpk commented Nov 21, 2017

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:

The subscriber MUST NOT use these Link headers to identify the subscription corresponding to the content distribution request, because the Link headers are metadata associated with the topic content, not with any particular subscription. For example, the topic URL in the content distribution request may be different from the topic URL that was originally subscribed to.

Does this read better @mkovatsc, and @julien51 does this still match your intent of what the spec should say?

@julien51
Copy link
Collaborator

Works for me!

aaronpk added a commit that referenced this issue Nov 22, 2017
"For example, the topic URL in the content distribution request may be different from the topic URL that was originally subscribed to"

for #143
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants