# Re: Agent-mediated access, kidcode critiques, and community standards

Jim Conklin (conklin@info.cren.net)
Wed, 21 Jun 1995 10:43:39 -0500

- Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
- Next message: Mitra: "Re: Belated comments on OCLC's proposal"
- Previous message: World Wide Web: "[WWW-REGISTER] GBF"
- Maybe in reply to: Paul Grous: "Agent-mediated access, kidcode critiques, and community standards"

    Message-Id: <199506211441.KAA21463@info.cren.net>

    Date: Wed, 21 Jun 1995 10:43:39 -0500

    To: hardie@merlot.arc.nasa.gov (Ted Hardie)

    From: conklin@info.cren.net (Jim Conklin)

    Subject: Re: Agent-mediated access, kidcode critiques, and community standards

Ted's comment triggered a wonder as to whether it might be reasonable to
have this processing done by the server instead of the client, by having
the client send a selection criterion that the server would compare to the
selection info for the material requested before returning that material.
In order to handle those servers that don't implement such a scheme and
return the material regardless of the selction criterion, servers that
implement would have to return (in addition to the material requested) a
conformance indicator to let the client know that the material returned was
compliant with the selection criterion.

Jim

At 4:04 PM 6/20/95 -0700, Ted Hardie wrote:
> I certainly agree that the labeling we are discussing is quite
>different from setting up a robot exclusion standard, and that the
>hits against an /audience.txt would be extensive. Several things
>could be done at the browser level to minimize the impact (by checking
>headers for changes before retrieving the text of /audience.txt, for
>example). No matter what is done to speed things, though, there is no
>doubt that adding this extra step would slow browsers, since they
>would need to do a retrieval and parse the text before getting actual
>data. Presumably, those using browsers to screen based on
>audience.txt would be willing to put up with the extra time.

- Next message: Mitra: "Re: Belated comments on OCLC's proposal"
- Previous message: World Wide Web: "[WWW-REGISTER] GBF"
- Maybe in reply to: Paul Grous: "Agent-mediated access, kidcode critiques, and community standards"