Re: [whatwg/fetch] Editorial: make WebSocket use obtain a connection (#1241)

@annevk commented on this pull request.



> @@ -7425,32 +7417,6 @@ fetch("https://www.example.com/")
 </div>
 
 
-<h3 id=websocket-connections>Connections</h3>
-
-<p>To <dfn id=concept-websocket-connection-obtain>obtain a WebSocket connection</dfn>, given a
-<var>url</var>, run these steps:
-
-<ol>
- <li><p>Let <var ignore>host</var> be <var>url</var>'s <a for=url>host</a>.
-
- <li><p>Let <var ignore>port</var> be <var>url</var>'s <a for=url>port</a>.
-
- <li><p>Let <var ignore>secure</var> be false, if <var>url</var>'s <a for=url>scheme</a> is
- "<code>http</code>", and true otherwise.
-
- <li><p>Follow the requirements stated in step 2 to 5, inclusive, of the first set of steps in
- <a href=http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6455#section-4.1>section 4.1</a> of The WebSocket Protocol

@ddragana convinced me that the win from partitioning might be small, as it might be indistinguishable from network jitter (as it's only blocking during connection creation). So maybe that's not needed.

But I also reached the conclusion that this brings up the define "DNS lookup" question again. @sleevi would like to keep everything in "obtain a connection", but this seems to make that rather hard. I suppose we could wave our hands a bunch and describe it implicitly as the current RFC is doing, but ugh.

(I'll try to clean this up in due course by moving this discussion into its own issue, but for now this suffices I think.)

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/whatwg/fetch/pull/1241#discussion_r639825880