Re: [hybi] Apples and Orangutans

[Maciej Stachowiak <[e-mail]>]

On Apr 12, 2009, at 3:35 PM, Ian Hickson wrote:

> On Sun, 12 Apr 2009, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
>>
>> I like Minimal/Event too, although I am starting to think the  
>> WebSocket
>> protocol may be a bit too minimal. I think adding an optional type  
>> field
>> to the packet or to the initial negotiation would help independently
>> developed client and server code coordinate, much in the way MIME  
>> types
>> help HTTP clients and servers without the necessity to define every
>> possible type up front or to couple a single client to a single  
>> server.
>> [...] TCP includes a port number (associated with protocols by
>> convention)
>
> WebSocket includes a path (from the ws:// URL), which is intended to  
> be
> analogous to the TCP port number.
>
> Does that address this particular point satisfactorily?

I'm not sure the path is a good choice for identifying the type of  
service available. HTTP has both a path and a type. The path is sent  
by the client and identifies the specific resource. The type is sent  
by the server and directs how the resource is to be interpreted. I do  
not think we can expect, for example, multiple chat services to use  
the same path format, but there may be multiple chat services which  
choose to use the same protocol-by-convention over WebSocket. Right  
now, there doesn't seem to be a good way to give this information to  
the client, in the same way that any arbitrary URL can tell the client  
that its contents are to be interpreted as XML or PDF or plain text.

Regards,
Maciej