W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-dist-auth@w3.org > July to September 2010

Re: Proposal for work on an efficient, browser-friendly, HTTP-based communication protocol for fine-grained information exchange

From: Michael Wechner <michael.wechner@wyona.com>
Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2010 09:52:23 +0100
Message-ID: <4C762B47.2010205@wyona.com>
To: David Nuescheler <david@day.com>
CC: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org
David Nuescheler wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> Julian and I (and occasionally many others) have been discussing a
> development effort like this for quite while.
> I was involved in mapping the scope of WebDAV (and friends) into a
> Java API called JCR[1][2][3] (on which for example Geoff, Julian and
> Roy participated) and due to my Day[4] job (pun intended) I find
> myself very often in a situation where I need have a standard
> web-browser or client-sided web-application interact with a server to
> exchange fine-grained information.
>   

can you give a "real-world" example such that I can understand better :-) ?

And also where the existing "protocols" are lacking?

Thanks

Michael
> Thanks a lot to everybody for all the comments and input.
>
> I guess my main take from this is that I completely agree that we need
> to separate the "model"-conversation from the
> "format/binding"-conversation.
>
> I would like to mention though that in my mind the goal of making this
> effort relevant, efficient and simple is extremely important as well.
> While I appreciate that the separation of the discussions, I would
> like to volunteer to work on bindings to a JSON + PATCH (multipart
> POST) very early on in the process and keep it in sync with the model
> as a living set of examples for the interaction with the more abstract
> model, to ensure that we keep things practical.
>
> I think there are of a large number of very similar, JSON/POST-based
> "protocols" that are defined in an ad-hoc manner by developers. So
> there should be quite a bit of experience out there, that can help us
> gauge the importance some of requirements fairly quickly. I think if
> we manage to take the combined the experience from WebDAV, AtomPub and
> JCR (and possibly more domain specific efforts like CMIS) in terms of
> the overall scope and the initial relevance of certain features we
> should be in great shape.
>
> regards,
> david
>
> [1] http://jcp.org/en/jsr/detail?id=170
> [2] http://jcp.org/en/jsr/detail?id=283
> [3] http://jcp.org/en/jsr/detail?id=333
> [4] http://www.day.com
>
>   
Received on Thursday, 26 August 2010 08:59:27 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 August 2010 08:59:28 GMT