Re: Mnot's Pub/Sub for the Web

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.