W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > July to September 2011

Re: [websockets] Making optional extensions mandatory in the API (was RE: Getting WebSockets API to Last Call)

From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2011 08:06:15 -0700
To: "Aryeh Gregor" <Simetrical+w3c@gmail.com>, "Takeshi Yoshino" <tyoshino@google.com>
Cc: "Adrian Bateman" <adrianba@microsoft.com>, "Web Applications Working Group WG (public-webapps@w3.org)" <public-webapps@w3.org>, "Maciej Stachowiak" <mjs@apple.com>, "Arthur Barstow" <art.barstow@nokia.com>, "Ian Hickson" <ian@hixie.ch>, "ifette@google.com" <ifette@google.com>, "jonas@sicking.cc" <jonas@sicking.cc>, "simonp@opera.com" <simonp@opera.com>, "Brian Raymor" <Brian.Raymor@microsoft.com>, "Greg Wilkins" <gregw@intalio.com>
Message-ID: <op.vy99kpjh64w2qv@annevk-macbookpro.local>
On Wed, 27 Jul 2011 03:35:03 -0700, Takeshi Yoshino <tyoshino@google.com>  
> Is new XHR spec going to make gzip mandatory for its underlying HTTP?

I do not think that analogy makes sense. The WebSocket protocol can only  
be used through the WebSocket API, HTTP is prevalent in more places.  
Having said that, XMLHttpRequest does place constraints on HTTP. E.g. it  
requires redirects to be followed, it does not expose 1xx responses, only  
works cross-origin in combination with CORS, etc.

Anne van Kesteren
Received on Wednesday, 27 July 2011 15:07:28 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 27 October 2017 07:26:34 UTC