Re: [hybi] HyBi WG update

Dave Cridland <> Thu, 22 July 2010 07:52 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id C41733A6922 for <>; Thu, 22 Jul 2010 00:52:05 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.11
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.11 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_05=-1.11]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 7l1hSfq1eECm for <>; Thu, 22 Jul 2010 00:52:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 87D743A68A2 for <>; Thu, 22 Jul 2010 00:52:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1C67F116805C; Thu, 22 Jul 2010 08:52:20 +0100 (BST)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at
Received: from ([]) by localhost (localhost.localdomain []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 1v4QAaNBIfL8; Thu, 22 Jul 2010 08:52:18 +0100 (BST)
Received: from puncture (puncture []) by (Postfix) with ESMTPA id AED711168041; Thu, 22 Jul 2010 08:52:18 +0100 (BST)
References: <> <> <> <> <> <>
In-Reply-To: <>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <27220.1279785138.694333@puncture>
Date: Thu, 22 Jul 2010 08:52:18 +0100
From: Dave Cridland <>
To: Adam Barth <>, Server-Initiated HTTP <>, Greg Wilkins <>
Content-Type: text/plain; delsp="yes"; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed"
Subject: Re: [hybi] HyBi WG update
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Server-Initiated HTTP <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 22 Jul 2010 07:52:05 -0000

On Thu Jul 22 01:42:36 2010, Adam Barth wrote:
> This is standard operating procedure for browser vendors.  If we
> waited for specs to stop moving before gaining implementation
> experience, we'd never get anything done.  If you'd like to see how
> this works in practice, I recommend looking over the history of the
> HTML parsing algorithm in HTML5.

FWIW, it's SOP for email and XMPP folk, too, but the difference seems  
to be that we're happy to track changes once a week or once a month,  
and know we're experimentally implementing a known version, rather  
than have new variants of the protocol out every day, which would  
mean you should have no clear idea if you're even meant to be  
interoperating with another implementation.

I think this issue is likely a lot more of an issue with a network  
protocol, incidentally, than with HTML parsing, which I suspect can  
be done in isolation.

Speaking of seeing how this works in practise, I would note in  
passing that browsers have a quite horrible reputation for  
interoperability failure in terms of HTML rendering differences, from  
what I've observed; maybe changing tactics would even be worthwhile  
investigating there.

Dave Cridland - -
  - acap://
Infotrope Polymer - ACAP, IMAP, ESMTP, and Lemonade