Just wanna say: Sounds great. Sorry for the radio silence in general. Let's
move things forward.

On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 9:42 AM, Julien Genestoux <[email protected]
> wrote:

> Ok, I'll start to send new topics with each of the points above. I think
> it would help to have acouple googlers to participate in there too :)
>
> There are a couple other things I want to see as extensions, like the
> ability to "count" updates in a feed and forward that to subscribers, s
> that they know they haven't missed any entry :)
>
> Julien
>
>
>
> On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 9:32 AM, Justin Richer <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Definitely agree with these points, though I'd add that I want to see a
>> standardized binding to OAuth2.
>>
>>  -- Justin
>>
>> On Wed, 2011-11-02 at 15:59 +0000, Alexis Richardson wrote:
>> > +1
>> >
>> > On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 3:37 PM, Julien Genestoux
>> > <[email protected]> wrote:
>> > > All,
>> > > I think it's time to move forward and clean up the protocol a bit.
>> Right
>> > > now, I believe it is too specific on some points (explicit support for
>> > > Atom), but also a little too vague on other points.
>> > > I probably don't want to discuss all the changes in details in this
>> thread,
>> > > but maybe list a couple ideas, as well as get volunteers to help with
>> this.
>> > > The goal is too clean up the spec, and maybe write a couple
>> > > extensions/guideline on top of it for specific use cases (private
>> > > resources)...
>> > > Here is in my mind a couple things that needs to be
>> > > addresses/changed/updated/improved:
>> > > - Support for arbitrary content
>> > > - Support for private feeds
>> > > - Removal of verify_token
>> > > - Subscription invalidation/expiration
>> > > - Publisher - Hub relationship
>> > > - Topic "redirection".
>> > > Please add your topic/name to that list and post another message to
>> address
>> > > it in more details. Hopefully this thread will help us keep track of
>> what
>> > > changes are being worked on.
>>
>>
>>
>

Reply via email to