On Fri, 8 Jul 2011, Adrian Bateman wrote: > > > > I strongly disagree. We must have interoperability amongst browser > > user agents. Having some support compression and others not would lead > > to authoring mistakes and will force us into either having or not > > having compression based on how big sites first get this wrong. > > It's fine to disagree, but you should disagree in the IETF working group > where this is made optional and not in the Web API. There will be other > users of WebSockets outside the browser and by implementing the protocol > they won't be required to implement this extension.
Non-browser clients don't have the same dynamics, so it makes sense for them to be allowed to not implement compression. Non-browser clients aren't going to have the market impact of browser clients. -- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
