Just like to say +1 on some sort of public forum/mailing list. While I'm not sure how much I can contribute, as we will certainly be making use of any standard c/s devised we want to encourage its creation and interoperability as much as possible. I'll contribute where I can,
-Thomas arwave.org ps. Is there any point working with the original standards if there was known problems? Isnt it better to work now from the roadmaps planned system? ~~~~~~ Reviews of anything, by anyone; www.rateoholic.co.uk Please try out my new site and give feedback :) On 29 May 2011 10:58, Adrian Cochrane <[email protected]> wrote: > avid Hearnden <[email protected]> Wed, May 25, 2011 at 8:36 AM >> Reply-To: [email protected], [email protected] >> To: wave-dev <[email protected]> >> There is a technical roadmap (i.e., rich design docs etc, published >> somewhere on the site - let me know if you can't find them) for a new >> protocol that overcomes many of the issues with the current one, and works >> much better with more advanced features (e.g. diff-on-open). I don't think >> it's a moving target - the doc has been ready for a few months, and I don't >> think anyone has significant changes to it in mind. However, AFAIK, nobody >> who's available has signed up to do the work, so there is no timeline for >> it. I was keen to get into it a few months back, and Alex North was too, >> but both our availabilities have significantly diminished. It's probably >> about 2-3 weeks of work for someone to see it through end to end though. It >> was previously blocked by a few things that have now been implemented. > >> I would strongly encourage not building too much on the current protocol, >> since it has a number of known limitations. The new protocol is simpler and >> achieves a better separation of functionality. If there are a few people >> (PyOfWave?) with the will and a bit of time, then it is very achievable to >> get it rolled out. > >> -Dave > > I will be proud to go over it, but (because I want to be liberal) I'd > first ask to start > with a forum or mailing list which I'd refer to as 'The Confederate' > after Firefly T.V. > series which gave Wave it's name. I've already exchanged some messages > with josephg on GitHub on > the shareJS Wave project on this. > > What I planned to work with, if I didn't get proper standardization, is > the extended original > standards (to make up for some lacking features I say), a non-HTTP > alternative to Simple Data > Protocol, an fully designed Gadget API in a derivative of CoffeeScript > (to simplify offline clients), > and a URL scheme to serve for embedding, WaveThis, and a alias query for > groups. > > I'll get started on it provided that I am provided with the necessary > information on how to do > it. However on my project, I've got some work on PyOfWave to finish. > -- > [email protected] > > -- > http://www.fastmail.fm - Email service worth paying for. Try it for free > >
