Re: Review Request: Raw Socket API

On Sun, May 19, 2013 at 3:35 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 7:08 AM, Mounir Lamouri <mounir@lamouri.fr> wrote:
>> Hi script-coord,
>>
>> The SysApps WG just moved the Raw Socket API to FPWD and is looking for
>> feedback regarding the idiomatic and Javascript-y aspects of the API:
>> http://www.w3.org/2012/sysapps/raw-sockets/
>>
>> The specification doesn't clarify much the security aspects of the API
>> (it should live behind a permission as described in the security model
>> document) so please don't focus on that part.
>>
>> Feel free to have a look at the current issues [1] and open a new one [2].
>>
>> [1] https://github.com/sysapps/raw-sockets/issues
>> [2] https://github.com/sysapps/raw-sockets/issues/new
>
> I'm looking over this now, but as a heads-up to other script-coord
> folks:  this is a "binary streams" API, similar to Node's streams.  If
> you're interested in getting that variety of stream right, it would be
> nice to do so here, in this API, so it doesn't get held up as a
> mistake-but-you-should-be-compatible-with-it in the future.

For what it's worth, the intent of these APIs were definitely not that
they would become the basis for "binary streams".

Though it would be very interesting to make these APIs use a "binary
stream" primitive rather than what they are currently using.

I recently sent a *very* rough draft for what the reading side of a
generic "binary stream" API could look like to the public-webapps list
a couple of days ago.

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2013AprJun/0727.html

/ Jonas

Received on Monday, 20 May 2013 05:53:39 UTC