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 11:11:35 -0700
To: "Takeshi Yoshino" <tyoshino@google.com>
Cc: "Aryeh Gregor" <Simetrical+w3c@gmail.com>, "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.vzah5lx564w2qv@annevk-macbookpro.local>
On Wed, 27 Jul 2011 11:04:09 -0700, Takeshi Yoshino <tyoshino@google.com>  
wrote:
> So, let me correct my text by s/XHR/HTML5 <http://www.w3.org/TR/html5/>/.

HTML5 is mostly transport-layer agnostic.

I am not sure why we are going through this theoretical side-quest on  
where we should state what browsers are required to implement from HTTP to  
function. The HTTP protocol has its own set of problems and this is all  
largely orthogonal to what we should do with the WebSocket protocol and  
API.

If you do not think this particular extension makes sense raise it as a  
last call issue with the WebSocket protocol and ask for the API to require  
implementations to not support it. Lets not meta-argue about this.


-- 
Anne van Kesteren
http://annevankesteren.nl/
Received on Wednesday, 27 July 2011 18:12:52 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 18:49:46 GMT