- From: Harry Halpin <hhalpin@w3.org>
- Date: Sat, 31 Jan 2015 17:28:31 +0100
- To: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>, Evan Prodromou <evan@e14n.com>
- CC: public-socialweb@w3.org
On 01/31/2015 03:47 AM, Sandro Hawke wrote: > On 01/29/2015 04:30 PM, Evan Prodromou wrote: >> Everyone is blown away by the size of these requirements already. >> >> A streaming protocol for streams would be a great addition later, but >> trying to jam it in here will literally sink this project. >> >> Please accept this as being out of scope. > > I might be misunderstanding what you mean by "out of scope". To me, in > a WG, "out of scope" means "we're not even going to talk about this > issue, because it's not the kind of problem our charter says we're > supposed to talk about". In general, it's up to the chairs in guiding > to conversation to steer it away from things that are out of scope (in > this sense) given their reading of the charter. > > What I think you're saying above is that you don't think streams/push > should be one of the requirements for the API. That's plausible, but > maybe we can label that as "Not a requirement", instead of "out of > scope"? That is, it's up to the group to come to consensus on what > the requirements for the API are, and you're arguing this should not be > one. I'm sympathetic to your argument, but I'd also be interested in > hearing whether likely vendors of this stuff think they can sell systems > without streaming/push. > > The alternative interpretation is that maybe you think our charter > doesn't allow us to even consider this as a possible requirement, that > it's out-of-scope for the group. Like, an authentication system would > surely be out-of-scope, and Harry was just arguing that WebFinger is out > of scope. As pointed out, WebApps is already dealing with streaming and push. We should simply co-ordinate around their Rec-track work (which has all browser vendors involved BTW) and rather than reinvent wheel. > > -- Sandro > >> >> Evan Prodromou >> >>> On Jan 29, 2015, at 15:00, ☮ elf Pavlik ☮ >>> <perpetual-tripper@wwelves.org> wrote: >>> >>>> On 01/29/2015 02:21 AM, Sandro Hawke wrote: >>>>> On 01/28/2015 06:13 PM, Evan Prodromou wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> - Can you justify most of the out-of-scope stuff? Without streaming >>>>>> or push, I don't see how this system could catch on. >>>>> I think that server-to-server stuff is going to be more pertinent when >>>>> we discuss the federation protocol. >>>> Clients need streaming/push, too, don't they? >>> +1 >>> >>> in my experiments a while ago i used HTTP + JSON based pub/sub protocol >>> Bayeux: http://svn.cometd.org/trunk/bayeux/bayeux.html >>> >>> using one of its implementations: http://faye.jcoglan.com/ >>> >>> mentioned decentralized prototype with real time geolocation map layers: >>> https://github.com/dspace-ng/dspace-app-action-slim >>> >>> > >
Received on Saturday, 31 January 2015 16:28:39 UTC