Re: [hybi] Extensibility mechanisms?

[John Tamplin <[e-mail]>]

On Tue, Jul 20, 2010 at 6:14 PM, Ian Hickson <[e-mail]> wrote:

> What I'm interested in personally is writing a protocol that amateur
> programmers can implement easily. If we say they have to use someone
> else's code to do this, then that's a failure, IMHO. (Though as I've
> mentioned before, if people have different goals or priorities, I have no
> problem with separate protocols also being designed to address those --
> Web Sockets doesn't have to be everything for everybody.)


I still don't see the argument for servers written by amateurs.  I have used
far more quick-and-dirty web clients (telnet, socket/connect/write in C,
wget/curl, etc) than I have quick-and-dirty servers.  If some amateur needs
to write a server anyway, they aren't going to write it from scratch even if
it were possible for them to do so -- they will find some library.

Contrast this with embedded clients, which might well have tighter
constraints than most clients, and could benefit from having optional
features they could leave out that would be useful for more powerful
clients.  Meanwhile, the servers are going to almost certainly be on more
powerful machines, though granted they have more connections to support.

-- 
John A. Tamplin
Software Engineer (GWT), Google