Re: [hybi] updated Charter proposal (WebSocket)

[Ian Hickson <[e-mail]>]

On Mon, 26 Oct 2009, Greg Wilkins wrote:
> Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
> > 
> > I agree with that point of view. It seems sensible to use WebSocket 
> > Protocol as the starting point, even if we see the need to add 
> > features or otherwise change the protocol. There doesn't seem to be a 
> > strong case for starting from scratch.
> 
> [...] I don't think the charter should mandate the WebSocket protocol as 
> the outcome.
> 
> The protocol should be able to be selected on it's own merits - and that 
> includes the effort that many have put towards it already.

I agree with Greg that it would be inappropriate for the WG to be bound to 
adopt a particular proposal or rubber-stamp a particular proposal.

What matters much more is that the group's deliverables have the buy-in of 
the relevant implementors -- if we write a technology that is intended to 
be implemented by proxy vendors, then proxy vendors need to be willing to 
implement it. If we write a technology that is intended to be implemented 
by Web browsers, then Web browsers need to be willing to implement it. 
Otherwise, we're just wasting our time writing boring science fiction.

-- 
Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'