Hi Max & Mobile folks! On 07/26/2014 01:26 AM, Max Semenik wrote: > I'd like to hear your thoughts on how it can be > changed, can its interface be simplified (e.g. [1]), how fast do we want it > to perform, what do we expect from Parsoid migration.
The main benefit from using Parsoid HTML is that it enables you to more easily re-style or massage the content with a stable HTML spec [DOMSpec]. As an example, it is straightforward to identify transclusion expansions in Parsoid HTML, which lets you pull out this content or massage it to better display on mobile. The full HTML for each revision will be available as static HTML. The other area of interest to you should be the upcoming storage service & REST API. This infrastructure will help to provide a low-latency REST interface backed by storage. First performance data shows a request latency in the single-digit ms area at request rates of around 2k req/s, using a single CPU thread. There will also be a mechanism to pre-generate custom content after an edit, so that a later request will typically just retrieve a stored blob. > On Tue, Jul 29, 2014 at 10:32 AM, Brion Vibber <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> On a slow connection pulling down multiple sections in one blob is tricky > -- JSON decoders don't normally stream so we end up being pretty slow with > that "second section and beyond" request. I guess it would make sense to benchmark different solutions, including loading the full HTML & letting it render progressively. Images etc could perhaps be disabled by default outside the first section, and then uncovered / re-enabled progressively by JS. >> I would love to be able to include action=query stuff along with a mobile > view request, such as grabbing the current user and site metadata. > > Sigh, without core support we can only do one-offs to return select parts in > mobileview. Is there anything particular that you want? Also, it's not a > browser environment and you can actually make a couple reqests in parallel > to e.g. decouple siteinfo retrieval. There will also be SPDY support in the foreseeable future, which will further cheapen individual requests. Ops currently has this scheduled for Q2, and I'll push for the REST API to enable it from the start. Yuvi also has been running Nginx with SPDY for the labs proxy for a long time now. >> Exposing CSS and scripting modules for extensions used would be nice. > Alternately we can try to retool things intoself contained embeddable I > frames. > > This is something worth investigating (as well as returning mw.config values > related to page being retrieved), however I suspect that there will be a few > wwonderful obstacles to work around, as a lot of extensions just add their > modules/variables to OutpuPage in hooks scarily close to page display, > making a lot of assumptions that are not true for API page views. This is somewhat related to https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=67540. We plan to expose this metadata through the REST API, so that clients can load the right modules for the page content. Gabriel [DOMSpec]: https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Parsoid/MediaWiki_DOM_spec _______________________________________________ Mobile-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mobile-l
