W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-media-fragment@w3.org > April 2009

Re: Naming suggestion: single/dual roundtrip for 2-way/4-way handshake

From: Jack Jansen <Jack.Jansen@cwi.nl>
Date: Sun, 12 Apr 2009 00:17:16 +0200
Cc: RaphaŽl Troncy <Raphael.Troncy@cwi.nl>, Conrad Parker <conrad@metadecks.org>, Media Fragment <public-media-fragment@w3.org>
Message-Id: <A66B4DBF-1086-41A0-9C86-903A1DB86A85@cwi.nl>
To: Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>
My 2 cents:
1. The current "handshake" terms have a serious problem, in  
distributed systems research "N-way handshake" is used in protocols  
between N parties. So 4-way handshake would suggest 4 parties are  
involved.
2. Retrieval is a great term. Single step retrieval and 2-step  
retrieval (or something similar) are fine.
3. Get is even better, because it's shorter. Single (or 1-step) get  
and 2-step get: fine.
4. Partial get may be better again, because even though it's longer  
it's a better fit to what we're actually doing. For now, this one has  
my vote.
--
Jack Jansen, <Jack.Jansen@cwi.nl>, http://www.cwi.nl/~jack
If I can't dance I don't want to be part of your revolution -- Emma  
Goldman
Received on Saturday, 11 April 2009 22:18:23 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 21 September 2011 12:13:32 GMT