Re: lynx-dev caching after \ (was why reload etc?)

[Jacob Poon]

On Wed, 8 Jul 1998, Philip Webb wrote:

> 980707 Bela Lubkin wrote: 
> > David Woolley wrote:
> >> there is a strong lobby to have the code added by some DOS/Windows users.
> > I'm not a DOS/Windows user
> > and I'm strongly in favor of Lynx caching unmodified source pages.
> 
> the basic problem here is not programming or system considerations,
> but the shape of debate at lynx-dev, which immediately gets confused.
> there are TWO SEPARATE issues, with different reactions:
> 
> (1) should Lynx cache ALL source files?
>     -- there seems to be strong feeling by users with limited resources
>     that this would not be useful enough to justify the load involved;

I would say yes, because you can't correctly generate the source from the
rendered URI, but the opposite is quite possible.

> (2) should Lynx cache JUST THOSE source files obtained by  \ ?
>     -- some of us believe this would indeed be very useful
>     when trying to track down what's wrong with someone's bad HTML
>     & would not happen often enough to overload anyone's system.

I would say no for that one, unless explicitly told not to or
cache is too small for storing rendered pages.

> there is then another question:
> 
> (3) how should Lynx internally name such cached files?

I thought we already have this one long time ago.  Just add another URL
header string before the original URIs.  The only thing left is what is
the name for this URL.  Will it be:

'lynxsrc:'?
'URIsrc:'?
'source:'?
Anything else?

If we want to get it implement quickly, we better cast the votes right
now before we forget it once again.