- From: Jason Duell <jduell.mcbugs@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 01 Jun 2012 12:33:47 -0700
- To: Takeshi Yoshino <tyoshino@google.com>
- CC: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>, Simon Pieters <simonp@opera.com>, public-webapps@w3.org
On 05/28/2012 04:03 AM, Takeshi Yoshino wrote:
> The protocol spec has defined 1015, but I think we should not pass
> through it to the WebSocket API.
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2011OctDec/0437.html
>
> I think 1006 is the right code for all of WebSocket handshake failure,
> TLS failure and TCP connection failure. If the language in
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6455#section-7.4.1 is not good, we can
> add "cannot be opened or" before "closed abnormally" for clarification.
>
I could certainly live with this. It would be nice to have it clarified
in the W3C websocket spec that we won't be delivering 1015 (I assume
it's too late to take it out of RFC 6455). And to have the additional
language you suggest for 1006 ("connection could not be opened" or
something like that) added somewhere (again I assume RFC 6455 isn't
possible, but the IANA database and/or the W3C spec).
best,
Jason
Mozilla
Received on Friday, 1 June 2012 19:34:16 UTC