I can imagine us developing a spec with a number of people that have been implementing and working with webhooks that is specific to that goal of "subscribe to resource, get updates" that PSHB can incorporate. And it should ideally be friendly to the webhook APIs people have already developed that could be don't always fit PSHB (GitHub, Twilio, FreshBooks, Pusher to name a few that I think have thought about it the most).
-jeff On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 2:32 PM, Julien Genestoux < [email protected]> wrote: > Oh, and if that involves changing the name of the spec, as well as > changing the "leadership" around it, I'm all for it and willing to > participate. > > Julien > > > > On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 11:31 PM, Julien <[email protected]>wrote: > >> Jeff, thanks for sharing so quickly :) >> I perfectly agree and acknowledge that PubSubHubbub is currently too >> much oriented toward data feeds, and content in general, while it's >> just a sub-case. >> I also think the "realtime" aspect of things doesn't matter that much, >> and is just a consequence of the "push" design. When you trigger >> events, there is no reason to do it later than sooner. >> >> The spec should evolve in something that works as well for events than >> for content. >> It should be "subscribe to a web resource, get events". [this can be >> decorated in any way people want to work with feeds, with publisher/ >> hubs merged or distinct, with no data... etc.] >> >> Julien >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Nov 28, 11:21 pm, Jeff Lindsay <[email protected]> wrote: >> > On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 2:02 PM, Julien Genestoux < >> > >> > [email protected]> wrote: >> > > Jeff, please do share your feelings. Help us make PubSubHubbub better! >> > > Bob, obviously pubsubhubub should be less about blogging and/or news. >> I >> > > started a thread about supporting any kind of arbitrary data, and >> this is >> > > what I had in mind as a way to suppoty any kind of content, and any >> type of >> > > updates (with our without payload). >> > >> > To this point, my main feeling is that, yes, PSHB is focused too much on >> > content. While I think this is useful (as its been the primary use >> case), >> > it's not a wide enough net to really have critical mass as a project. I >> > originally thought it was good that it was very focused and didn't solve >> > *my* particular problems. I also thought it was good it focused on a >> > tangible goal of making feeds more realtime. However, I think time has >> > shown it was not enough to be a big enough deal to sustain momentum as a >> > project. >> > >> > The problem is that this general problem PSHB solves has many different >> > views/perspectives/languages. For example, it can be message oriented >> and >> > talk about pubsub. Or it can be event oriented and talk about events etc >> > (the perspective used by Phil and them). Or it can even be thought of as >> > callbacks or hooks (webhooks). There are other similar concepts with >> > different language as well: updates/notifications, observers, etc. The >> two >> > main ones seem to be events vs messages/pubsub, and I'm not sure which >> one >> > is generally consider more general than the other. Ultimately, >> technically, >> > they're more or less the same thing, but I think the framing makes a >> *big* >> > difference. >> > >> > Anyway, that's the start of my ideas around this. >> > >> > -jeff >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > > Julien >> > >> > > On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 9:33 PM, Bob Wyman <[email protected]> wrote: >> > >> > >> The sitehttp://www.mostlybaked.com/provides a number of quick >> sketches >> > >> of applications that are things that I personally think should work >> well >> > >> over PSHB if the focus of PSHB became less about blogging and more >> about >> > >> the general case of publishing and subscribing to streams of data on >> the >> > >> Internet. Also, Phil often talks about the kinds of things that he'd >> like >> > >> to do with the EventedAPI on his blog. ex: >> > >> >> http://www.windley.com/archives/2011/11/personal_event_networks_and_v... >> > >> > >> bob wyman >> > >> > >> On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 1:16 PM, Bob Wyman <[email protected]> wrote: >> > >> > >>> See:http://www.eventedapi.org/spec >> > >> > >>> As we consider what can be done to move PubSubHubbub forward, it >> might >> > >>> make sense to take a look at some other protocols that folk have >> defined to >> > >>> determine if there is anything in them that PubSubHubbub should be >> > >>> implemented or if they do things better that PSHB does. The folk at >> Kynetx ( >> > >>>http://apps.kynetx.com/) have been building up a PSHB-like system >> for >> > >>> some time now... I'm not sure I understand why PSHB wouldn't, in >> fact, >> > >>> serve their needs. >> > >> > >>> bob wyman >> > >> > -- >> > Jeff Lindsayhttp://progrium.com >> > > -- Jeff Lindsay http://progrium.com
