Preview
Issue #1
Related articles can't be dynamic. See https://instantview.telegram.org/contest/finmarket.ru/template11/issue1/
- Љубиша Беговић
- See this issue:
https://instantview.telegram.org/contest/pcpress.rs/template20/issue1/
-----
Declined by admin
https://instantview.telegram.org/checklist#6-3-2-related-articles
"We will not accept issues on whether or not links formatted as “Related articles” are thematically related enough or static enough."
-----
If we omit this related block you will report "related articles are missing".
If we include this related block you think that this is "dynamic" and can't be related.
So, on the original site that can be related but on IV that can't be related.
Ridiculous.
And as you can see that marked link is absolutely related.
- Accepted by admin
- Note that the handling of <related> has been specifically updated and clarified in the checklist.
See here:
https://instantview.telegram.org/checklist#6-3-2-related-articles-and-other-more-links
The links of the last 3 related are for articles newer than the original source page article. So they do indeed seem dynamic. IVs are cached and do not handle dynamic content well, as they will show outdated information.
So this is a valid issue.
- Љубиша Беговић
- OK.
This isnt't appeal, just for clarification...
https://www.telegraf.rs/vesti/hronika/3049470-advokat-male-jane-ispitan-u-tuzilastvu-uskoro-podizanje-nove-optuznice-protiv-zorana-marjanovica
https://www.telegraf.rs/vesti/hronika/3049378-iva-i-milos-su-pravili-selfi-s-visine-pa-poginuli-najopasnije-fotografije-zbog-kojih-mladi-u-srbiji-rizikuju-svoj-zivot-foto
First url published: 8. april 2019 | 17:28
Second published: 8. april 2019 | 16:55
But second edited: 8. april 2019 | 16:55 » 17:48
Edited version are newer then original source page.
These URL are on first related block.
So, first related block also is dynamic and this website can't have related block because of caching?
- Accepted by admin
- That is a very good question. To clarify, if an IV has a published_date set, then the IV will be able to update the cache for a limited time. This limited time can handle "edits" that occur shortly after the article was published.
However, this limited cache updating will not work for articles that constantly change their content months or years later. Eventually, an IV with a published_date set will not be able to update the IV cache anymore.
In contrast, an IV without a published_date set can continue to update the IV's cache long after. However, this update interval is fairly long (two weeks or so, and may possibly change in future?). The cache update interval of no published_date set is much longer than the cache update interval of an IV with published_date set.
I hope this clarifies things for how IV caching works and what can be considered "dynamic" or not.
So in the case of your specific question regarding "edited" articles, they can effectively be considered static if the "edits" are done short
- Accepted by admin
- (Was cut of, here's the rest:)
So in the case of your specific question regarding "edited" articles, they can effectively be considered static if the "edits" are done shortly after the published_date.
- Type of issue
- IV page is missing essential content
- Reported
- Apr 5, 2019