Re: [hybi] Protocol simplicity and the "amateur programmer" standard
Greg Wilkins <gregw@webtide.com> Mon, 26 July 2010 01:25 UTC
Return-Path: <gregw@webtide.com>
X-Original-To: hybi@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: hybi@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BAE373A6831 for <hybi@core3.amsl.com>; Sun, 25 Jul 2010 18:25:53 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.82
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.82 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.703, BAYES_20=-0.74, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001]
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 2Wscx7XNM1r7 for <hybi@core3.amsl.com>; Sun, 25 Jul 2010 18:25:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-fx0-f44.google.com (mail-fx0-f44.google.com [209.85.161.44]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D5D033A67EC for <hybi@ietf.org>; Sun, 25 Jul 2010 18:25:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by fxm1 with SMTP id 1so6472590fxm.31 for <hybi@ietf.org>; Sun, 25 Jul 2010 18:26:11 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.223.122.195 with SMTP id m3mr5648381far.86.1280107571743; Sun, 25 Jul 2010 18:26:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.223.112.129 with HTTP; Sun, 25 Jul 2010 18:26:11 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <ECF0E97F-1DA2-4662-BA48-F68B65AA8179@apple.com>
References: <ECF0E97F-1DA2-4662-BA48-F68B65AA8179@apple.com>
Date: Mon, 26 Jul 2010 11:26:11 +1000
Message-ID: <AANLkTiki8YBPgoiUAKDM-NQ0UKGTa=Jwrb5v3LDJZpgq@mail.gmail.com>
From: Greg Wilkins <gregw@webtide.com>
To: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001636c5b142168d95048c40455a"
Cc: Hybi <hybi@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [hybi] Protocol simplicity and the "amateur programmer" standard
X-BeenThere: hybi@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Server-Initiated HTTP <hybi.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hybi>, <mailto:hybi-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/hybi>
List-Post: <mailto:hybi@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:hybi-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hybi>, <mailto:hybi-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 26 Jul 2010 01:25:53 -0000
On 26 July 2010 10:43, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com> wrote: * Keep the protocol as simple as possible to limit the number of bugs that professional programmers make. Maciej, thanks for trying to find a way around this road block. However, the problem with your revised requirement is that simplicity is not an requirement in itself. Simplicity is only a relative measure that can be used to evaluate solutions other requirements. When faced with a choice of multiple solutions for a particular requirement, obviously simplicity is high up there on the list of attributes to consider when evaluating the alternatives. However it is not the only attribute and matters such as performance, extensibility, compatibility, etc. are also considerations. In such circumstances, favouring simplicity is pretty self evident. My feeling is that what Ian really wants is that if we are faced with a choice between the simplicity of no-feature vs a complex non mandatory featured (eg content negotiation), that we will opt for simplicity. Ie, he is after a requirement to try to limit rampant featurism in the protocol. I do not disagree. So I'm wondering if the requirements document should contain text about minimalism rather than simplicity: it is not the intent of this protocol to provide all the features that could possibly be needed on bidirectional web communication. Rather it is the intent of this protocol to provide the minimalistic set of features required to achieve secure and efficient bidirectional communication without causing unreasonable complexity and transport concerns within the application layer. All aspects of the protocol must be motivated by specific identified requirements. regards
- Re: [hybi] Protocol simplicity and the "amateur p… Mike Belshe
- [hybi] Protocol simplicity and the "amateur progr… Maciej Stachowiak
- Re: [hybi] Protocol simplicity and the "amateur p… Greg Wilkins
- Re: [hybi] Protocol simplicity and the "amateur p… Willy Tarreau
- Re: [hybi] Proposed way forward for WebSockets Willy Tarreau
- Re: [hybi] Protocol simplicity and the "amateur p… James Graham
- Re: [hybi] Protocol simplicity and the "amateur p… Maciej Stachowiak
- Re: [hybi] Protocol simplicity and the "amateur p… Julian Reschke
- Re: [hybi] Protocol simplicity and the "amateur p… Ian Fette (イアンフェッティ)
- Re: [hybi] Protocol simplicity and the "amateur p… James Graham
- Re: [hybi] Protocol simplicity and the "amateur p… Micheil Smith
- Re: [hybi] Protocol simplicity and the "amateur p… Greg Wilkins
- Re: [hybi] Protocol simplicity and the "amateur p… Dave Cridland
- Re: [hybi] Protocol simplicity and the "amateur p… James Graham
- Re: [hybi] Protocol simplicity and the "amateur p… Adam Barth
- Re: [hybi] Protocol simplicity and the "amateur p… James Graham
- Re: [hybi] Protocol simplicity and the "amateur p… John Tamplin
- Re: [hybi] Adding clarification regarding future … Joe Hildebrand
- Re: [hybi] Protocol simplicity and the "amateur p… Greg Wilkins
- Re: [hybi] Protocol simplicity and the "amateur p… James Graham
- [hybi] Proposed way forward for WebSockets Ian Hickson
- Re: [hybi] Proposed way forward for WebSockets Maciej Stachowiak
- Re: [hybi] Proposed way forward for WebSockets Rob Sayre
- Re: [hybi] Proposed way forward for WebSockets Greg Wilkins
- Re: [hybi] Proposed way forward for WebSockets Michael Carter
- Re: [hybi] Proposed way forward for WebSockets Anne van Kesteren
- Re: [hybi] Proposed way forward for WebSockets Anne van Kesteren
- Re: [hybi] Proposed way forward for WebSockets John Tamplin
- Re: [hybi] Proposed way forward for WebSockets Anne van Kesteren
- [hybi] Adding clarification regarding future revi… Ian Hickson
- Re: [hybi] Proposed way forward for WebSockets Maciej Stachowiak
- Re: [hybi] Adding clarification regarding future … Simone Bordet
- Re: [hybi] Proposed way forward for WebSockets Dave Cridland
- Re: [hybi] Adding clarification regarding future … Thomson, Martin
- Re: [hybi] Proposed way forward for WebSockets gabriel montenegro
- Re: [hybi] Proposed way forward for WebSockets Thomson, Martin
- Re: [hybi] Adding clarification regarding future … Willy Tarreau
- Re: [hybi] Proposed way forward for WebSockets gabriel montenegro
- Re: [hybi] Proposed way forward for WebSockets Willy Tarreau
- Re: [hybi] Proposed way forward for WebSockets Adam Barth
- Re: [hybi] Proposed way forward for WebSockets Willy Tarreau
- Re: [hybi] Proposed way forward for WebSockets Dave Cridland
- Re: [hybi] Proposed way forward for WebSockets Anne van Kesteren
- Re: [hybi] Proposed way forward for WebSockets Lars Eggert
- Re: [hybi] Adding clarification regarding future … Pieter Hintjens
- Re: [hybi] Proposed way forward for WebSockets Greg Wilkins
- Re: [hybi] Adding clarification regarding future … Dave Cridland
- Re: [hybi] Adding clarification regarding future … Jamie Lokier
- Re: [hybi] Proposed way forward for WebSockets Jamie Lokier
- Re: [hybi] Adding clarification regarding future … Jamie Lokier
- Re: [hybi] Proposed way forward for WebSockets Jamie Lokier
- Re: [hybi] Proposed way forward for WebSockets Ian Fette (イアンフェッティ)
- Re: [hybi] Proposed way forward for WebSockets John Tamplin
- Re: [hybi] Proposed way forward for WebSockets Dave Cridland
- Re: [hybi] Proposed way forward for WebSockets Martin J. Dürst
- Re: [hybi] Proposed way forward for WebSockets Alexey Melnikov
- Re: [hybi] Proposed way forward for WebSockets Anne van Kesteren
- Re: [hybi] Proposed way forward for WebSockets Martin J. Dürst
- Re: [hybi] Proposed way forward for WebSockets Greg Wilkins
- Re: [hybi] Proposed way forward for WebSockets Anne van Kesteren