Re: [hybi] Framing take IV

[Greg Wilkins <[e-mail]>]

On 4 August 2010 14:13, Ian Hickson <[e-mail]> wrote:
> On Tue, 3 Aug 2010, Scott Ferguson wrote:
> If this is a rare occurence, then it's probably simplest to support this
> at the application layer - nothing stops anyone from having a subprotocol
> that defines the first byte/character of each message as being a
> "has continuation" byte.

Ian,

the thing that stops people defining subprotocols is that the concept
of a subprotocol is entirely undefined.

Currently it is exposed in the js API as a simple string.  There is no
indication how that string can be used, how capabilities can be
discovered, declared or negotiated.   There is no mechanism to
allocate op-codes in the first byte other than to come here and try to
convince you that my extension is a good idea.

If we can clearly define an extension and/or subprotocol mechanism
then I think we would be able to answer the concerns of those that
feel the need for particular features but see no way of achieving them
in the current protocol.

If we could clearly see how a browser and server could agree on
feature X extension without breaking applications using subprotocols
or intermediaries that know about ws framing, then there would not be
pressure to support feature X in the basic framing layer.

We are beyond the point that a hand waive of do it in a subprotocol is
satisfactory (specially as many see subprotocols as part of the
application space and not something that browser/servers should be
using for transparent extensions).


regards