- From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
- Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2011 11:11:35 -0700
- To: "Takeshi Yoshino" <tyoshino@google.com>
- Cc: "Aryeh Gregor" <Simetrical+w3c@gmail.com>, "Adrian Bateman" <adrianba@microsoft.com>, "Web Applications Working Group WG (public-webapps@w3.org)" <public-webapps@w3.org>, "Maciej Stachowiak" <mjs@apple.com>, "Arthur Barstow" <art.barstow@nokia.com>, "Ian Hickson" <ian@hixie.ch>, "ifette@google.com" <ifette@google.com>, "jonas@sicking.cc" <jonas@sicking.cc>, "simonp@opera.com" <simonp@opera.com>, "Brian Raymor" <Brian.Raymor@microsoft.com>, "Greg Wilkins" <gregw@intalio.com>
On Wed, 27 Jul 2011 11:04:09 -0700, Takeshi Yoshino <tyoshino@google.com> wrote: > So, let me correct my text by s/XHR/HTML5 <http://www.w3.org/TR/html5/>/. HTML5 is mostly transport-layer agnostic. I am not sure why we are going through this theoretical side-quest on where we should state what browsers are required to implement from HTTP to function. The HTTP protocol has its own set of problems and this is all largely orthogonal to what we should do with the WebSocket protocol and API. If you do not think this particular extension makes sense raise it as a last call issue with the WebSocket protocol and ask for the API to require implementations to not support it. Lets not meta-argue about this. -- Anne van Kesteren http://annevankesteren.nl/
Received on Wednesday, 27 July 2011 18:12:52 UTC