- From: Henrik Frystyk Nielsen <frystyk@w3.org>
- Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1998 19:59:57 -0500
- To: cchan2@notes.cc.bellcore.com, www-lib@w3.org
At 02:01 13/12/1998 -0500, cchan2@notes.cc.bellcore.com wrote: > In HTNet_newClient, it requires that there has to have a transport >object associate with it; otherwise it return "NO". But is it true that, >there may be a future access scheme that does not require to specify any >transport layer object? And there will be specified when it is registered >with the core by a application. Libwww has a stackable transport layer mechanism which looks like this: A URI scheme is linked to an application layer protocol module which in turn is linked to a transport module. An active instance of a transport object with in- and output streams is called a channel. That is, it is in fact possible to write a UDP module for HTTP, if that it what you want. The only transports currently available are TCP and local file access. There are parts of a WebMux transport but it is not working. > Well, that's what it takes me a while to trace the problem when I'm >trying to experiment with a new scheme like that for my school project... If you want to register a new URI scheme then you first link it to a protocol module using the HTProtocol_* methods. Then you register which transport this protocol should use using the HTTransport_* methods. You can see how this is done for the existing transports and protocols in http://www.w3.org/Library/src/HTInit.c Henrik -- Henrik Frystyk Nielsen, World Wide Web Consortium http://www.w3.org/People/Frystyk
Received on Sunday, 13 December 1998 21:41:16 UTC