- From: Michael Toomim <toomim@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2022 21:59:55 -1000
- To: Kévin Dunglas <kevin@dunglas.fr>
- Cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
Kévin: > Braid is very interesting and has a much broader scope (state > synchronization, P2P, etc). It also requires more changes to the > current software stack to be natively supported by the web platform. Just to be clear— neither Braid nor Mercure *require* changes to web browsers. They are like SSE: a new way using HTTP as it already exists, to give it new behaviors. > I wonder how we can move forward regarding the standardization of a > pub/sub protocol for web content and web browsers. Even if Mercure > gained traction outside of the IETF, it hasn't on this group. I was > thinking about proposing the final version of the spec as an > independent-track RFC, or to the W3C as it is very close to WebSub, > and is also related to the other specs published by the Social Web > Working Group (ActivityPub, and even Solid). But as the this topic is > discussed again, maybe could we work on a pub/sub protocol here? I think this work should be taken up in the HTTP group. "State Transfer" is an intimate component of both HTTP and ReST, and generalizing that to "State Synchronization" is a big deal for HTTP. This is a worthwhile topic for the HTTP working group to discuss.
Received on Saturday, 26 February 2022 08:00:12 UTC