I would definitely lend a hand in this, after all it is in my interest. 
-- 
  [email protected]


On Sat, 30 Apr 2011 18:06 -0700, "Michael MacFadden"
<[email protected]> wrote:
> It has been the intention since the beginning that as the WiaB project
> moves to apache that the protocol would stay with waveprotocol.org. 
> Admittedly it has been taking longer to migrate to Apache than we had
> planned.  We are actually picking up some steam now.  I would highly
> encourage anyone who is interested to ask to lend a hand on the wave
> protocol site.  However, there is still a lot of WiaB content that needs
> to be pulled over in to the apache wave project.
> 
> ~Michael
> 
> 
> On Apr 30, 2011, at 5:48 PM, ya knygar wrote:
> 
> > anyone?
> > i propose to reup the http://www.waveprotocol.org/
> > 
> > On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 7:51 AM, Adrian Cochrane <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> Hello WiAB,
> >> 
> >> As a separate server project manager, I have some ideas (not for version
> >> 1.0) and questions on Wave protocols.
> >> 
> >> Firstly, I am not clear how deltas are sent in the Federation Protocol
> >> (assuming, as I very much hope, it makes it into 1.0). Can someone
> >> clarify how those deltas are formatted.
> >> 
> >> Secondly, when I looked over Google's tutorials for the Simple Data
> >> Protocol and gadgets, it struck me that they could better accommodate
> >> offline clients, and the Wave This and embedding APIs were highly
> >> centralized. So I've designed a plain TCP/IP alternative to Simple Data
> >> Protocol using the same concepts, a simpler standard for Gadgets (which
> >> does not need browser integration), and a URL scheme (which I think is
> >> similar to yours) for embedding. Not wanting these to be proprietary, I
> >> will share them if I get some interest.
> >> 
> >> Again I am not proposing for release 1.0. I must also say I do not seek
> >> to insult these protocols with what I said, because they are superb and
> >> everything can be improved.
> >> 
> >> Thirdly, I think that there should be a better place to discuss
> >> protocols, and read up on them, which ideally would be decentralized
> >> just like IETF and W3C. Again this is no ones fault for not needing it
> >> at the point, but if there's me and you, it'll be great to have a
> >> standards organization to encourage others.
> >> --
> >>  [email protected]
> >> 
> >> --
> >> http://www.fastmail.fm - Or how I learned to stop worrying and
> >>                          love email again
> >> 
> >> 
> 

-- 
http://www.fastmail.fm - Accessible with your email software
                          or over the web

Reply via email to