Re: [apps-discuss] HYBI

Graham Klyne <GK@ninebynine.org> Fri, 25 March 2011 13:59 UTC

Return-Path: <GK@ninebynine.org>
X-Original-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 844283A6859 for <apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 25 Mar 2011 06:59:45 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.813
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.813 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.742, BAYES_00=-2.599, DATE_IN_PAST_03_06=0.044, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id VjRgi4fS-kT2 for <apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 25 Mar 2011 06:59:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from relay0.mail.ox.ac.uk (relay0.mail.ox.ac.uk [129.67.1.161]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9B6B43A68A6 for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Fri, 25 Mar 2011 06:59:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp0.mail.ox.ac.uk ([129.67.1.205]) by relay0.mail.ox.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 4.74) (envelope-from <GK@ninebynine.org>) id 1Q37Zl-0007se-1n; Fri, 25 Mar 2011 14:01:17 +0000
Received: from tinos.zoo.ox.ac.uk ([129.67.24.47]) by smtp0.mail.ox.ac.uk with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from <GK@ninebynine.org>) id 1Q37Zl-0007WL-1E; Fri, 25 Mar 2011 14:01:17 +0000
Message-ID: <4D8C6CBD.6070705@ninebynine.org>
Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2011 10:21:49 +0000
From: Graham Klyne <GK@ninebynine.org>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.24 (Macintosh/20100228)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Alexey Melnikov <alexey.melnikov@isode.com>
References: <4D87612E.3090900@dcrocker.net> <4D881C04.2080406@qualcomm.com> <4D885482.2050006@ninebynine.org> <6266.1300784475.434865@puncture> <4D8C390D.3050106@isode.com>
In-Reply-To: <4D8C390D.3050106@isode.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Oxford-Username: zool0635
Cc: General discussion of application-layer protocols <apps-discuss@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] HYBI
X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols <apps-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/apps-discuss>
List-Post: <mailto:apps-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2011 13:59:45 -0000

Alexey Melnikov wrote:
> Dave Cridland wrote:
> 
>> On Tue Mar 22 07:49:22 2011, Graham Klyne wrote:
>>
>>> FWIW, I can think of two simple (to describe) capabilities that  
>>> would help to make the web more widely usable as a application  
>>> platform:
>>>
>>> (a) a *simple* mechanism for pushing asynchronous notifications to  a 
>>> web application (browser-based or otherwise).  I had early hopes  for 
>>> HyBi, but have somewhat given up.
>>
>> As have many.
> 
> While I understand community frustration about HYBI WG discussions, I 
> think people really need to look now at the latest protocol spec. The 
> document has been improved substantially and I think it is actually 
> implementable at this point in time.

A fair point ... I really should go back and look again.

But, for context, my idea of *simple* here is a notification model that *could* 
be implemented today for browsers using Javascript-over-HTTP, and subsequently 
migrated to a more robust, native implementation in browsers.

(FWIW, I did a little development around this idea a few years ago: 
http://code.google.com/p/webbrick-events/, esp 
http://code.google.com/p/webbrick-events/wiki/EventModel.  My implementation 
uses a form of HTTP long-polling, but it was always my hope to more this to a 
more widely supported substrate.)

#g
--