Re: UAs shipping unprefixed websocket API implementations?

Hi Boris, All,

On 8/2/11 9:48 AM, ext Boris Zbarsky wrote:
> http://blog.chromium.org/2011/08/new-websocket-protocol-secure-and.html indicates 
> that the Chrome dev channel now has an unprefixed implementation of 
> the WebSocket API, as far as I can tell.  Also as far as I can tell, 
> the API is not really stabilized yet (e.g. there's the big open 
> question about whether the compression stuff is required or forbidden).
>
> Am I missing something?  Should UAs actually be shipping unprefixed 
> websockets at this point?

[I think Anne's replies to this thread (the head is [1]) addressed the 
status of the compression issue in the API.]

Regarding the spec stability question, there is a bit of chicken-and-egg 
issue here with the protocol and API. IIRC, HyBi WG met last week and I 
think it would be useful if one of the HyBi participants would provide a 
short status/plan of the protocol spec.

The open bug list for the Web Socket API is at [2]. Additionally, Thomas 
started a thread about redirects [3].

-Art Barstow

[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2011JulSep/0565.html

[2] 
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/buglist.cgi?query_format=advanced&short_desc_type=allwordssubstr&short_desc=&product=WebAppsWG&component=WebSocket+API+%28editor%3A+Ian+Hickson%29&longdesc_type=allwordssubstr&longdesc=&bug_file_loc_type=allwordssubstr&bug_file_loc=&status_whiteboard_type=allwordssubstr&status_whiteboard=&keywords_type=allwords&keywords=&bug_status=NEW&bug_status=ASSIGNED&bug_status=REOPENED&emailtype1=substring&email1=&emailtype2=substring&email2=&bug_id_type=anyexact&bug_id=&votes=&chfieldfrom=&chfieldto=Now&chfieldvalue=&cmdtype=doit&order=Reuse+same+sort+as+last+time&field0-0-0=noop&type0-0-0=noop&value0-0-0=

[3] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2011JulSep/0474.html

>
> -Boris
>

Received on Wednesday, 3 August 2011 12:53:16 UTC