RE: UAs shipping unprefixed websocket API implementations?

+Alexey (2nd editor on the HyBi websockets spec).

Yes, the compression scheme currently in the draft will most probably be dropped in the next revision. "Most probably" because that was the consensus in the f2f meeting last week, but in the IETF, all decision have to be confirmed on the mailing list. That confirmation is going on right now and I don't anticipate any issues with it (so it's a very strong 'most probably').

The minutes of the meeting have been published and capture the state of the latest resolutions:
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/hybi/current/msg08030.html

FYI, slides and agenda for last week's meeting are here:
http://tools.ietf.org/wg/hybi/agenda?item=agenda81.html 

The editors will be preparing a revision based on those resolutions. We *hope* to go to the IESG for their discussion and final approval of the spec this month.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Arthur Barstow [mailto:art.barstow@nokia.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 03, 2011 05:53
> To: ext Boris Zbarsky; Salvatore Loreto; Ian Fette; Gabriel Montenegro
> Cc: public-webapps@w3.org
> Subject: 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.htm
> > l 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_de
> sc_type=allwordssubstr&short_desc=&product=WebAppsWG&component=Web
> Socket+API+%28editor%3A+Ian+Hickson%29&longdesc_type=allwordssubstr&lo
> ngdesc=&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&emailtype
> 1=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 13:07:51 UTC