<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:foaf="http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/"><title>norman.walsh.name: Comments on /2003/06/26/cache</title><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://norman.walsh.name/2003/06/26/cache"/><id>http://norman.walsh.name/2003/06/26/cache/comments.atom</id><updated>2012-02-13T06:30:43.575784Z</updated><entry><title>Comment 1 on /2003/06/26/cache</title><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://norman.walsh.name/2003/06/26/cache#comment0001"/><id>http://norman.walsh.name/2010/09/25/oauth#comment0001</id><published>2003-06-26T13:37:17Z</published><updated>2003-06-26T13:37:17Z</updated><author><name>Jez Higgins</name><foaf:mbox_sha1sum>da39a3ee5e6b4b0d3255bfef95601890afd80709</foaf:mbox_sha1sum></author><content type="xhtml"><div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
    <p>Catalogs do not care about URI schemes, caches do.</p>
<p>Say you are using a custom URI scheme (which I know is a contentious issue all of it&amp;apos;s own) or some set of URNs you have cooked up, which map into an XML repository for instance.  You find yourself disconnected from the repository, a caching proxy (an HTTP caching proxy anyway :) ) isn&amp;apos;t going to help you no matter what, while a catalog will.</p>
  </div></content></entry><entry><title>Comment 2 on /2003/06/26/cache</title><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://norman.walsh.name/2003/06/26/cache#comment0002"/><id>http://norman.walsh.name/2010/09/25/oauth#comment0002</id><published>2003-07-02T20:47:19Z</published><updated>2003-07-02T20:47:19Z</updated><author><name>Mark Nottingham</name><foaf:mbox_sha1sum>da39a3ee5e6b4b0d3255bfef95601890afd80709</foaf:mbox_sha1sum></author><content type="xhtml"><div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
    <p>Response at: http://www.mnot.net/blog/archives/000106.html</p>
  </div></content></entry></feed>

