Then you can't do websockets, etc or whatever other protocol (maybe video?, who knows) the web platform decides to do in the future on the same socket/session. That would be a poor tradeoff.. and for what gain? What is the additional complexity of having the framing allow for non HTTP semantics? -=R On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 10:13 AM, James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> wrote: > +1 > On Feb 27, 2013 10:03 AM, "Martin Thomson" <martin.thomson@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> On 27 February 2013 00:49, Mike Belshe <mike@belshe.com> wrote: >> > My vote would be to nuke the layering and instead fold section 4 (the >> HTTP >> > Layering) into the appropriate sections of the framing layer. Trying to >> > make these generic frames seems like a distraction, and it would be >> simpler >> > for folks to read if these were just the basics of HTTP framing. >> >> I said as much to mark in private: the framing layer is for HTTP. A >> name implies that it might stand alone. That's not going to be true. >> The work to make it true is not worthwhile either. >> >>
Received on Wednesday, 27 February 2013 18:52:06 UTC