Someone is working on a wave client protocol now - but getting to grips with the wave code base is quite tricky so I wouldn't get your hopes up for anything soon. The idea is to separate the things being communicated from the method used to send them. I have a stake/bias in this as I have my own special use case for wave (arwave.org) that I want to work on.
Not sure what exactly is daft about gwt/websocket connection though. For web interfaces it makes sense to me. *shrugs*. But, yes, it would be great to be able to code in anything you want, for anything you want and still connect to any normal wiab server. On 5 January 2012 16:18, Doug <douglas.lin...@gmail.com> wrote: > Oh, don't get me wrong, that would be awesome! > > If we had a solid wave server with a wave api you could build whatever > front end you want (real time or not) on top of it. You could drop the daft > web socket connection and the GWT ui. That would be fantastic. > > Is that what's busy being built? > > Doesn't seem like it. > > ~ > Doug. > > On Thu, Jan 5, 2012 at 7:40 PM, Thomas Wrobel <darkfl...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Indeed wave allows you to *selectively* message anyone you want and >> have either private or public conversations as you wish with any >> combination of your contacts. >> This is its power over forums. >> You could somewhat have a forum like "skin" for the interface - but >> you could equally have a email like one, or a twitter like one, or a >> facebook style one. >> From waves perspective these are all subsets of its functionality. >> The tricky bit is making a interface that can do the most and preset >> it in the most intuitive way. >> >> I'm not against dedicated wave clients for different purpose's (after >> all, thats one advantage of a open federated protocol), but you need >> at least one client that does it all as a reference for the rest. >> >> >> ~~~~~~ >> Reviews of anything, by anyone; >> www.rateoholic.co.uk >> Please try out my new site and give feedback :) >> >> >> >> On 5 January 2012 12:14, Davide Carnovale >> <francesco.davide.carnov...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > Hi all, >> > imho wave is much more than a forum with a nice wysiwyg editor. >> > the real power and innovation behind wave is federation (that's why XMPP >> is >> > for) and partly also OT. >> > The thing is, if i have 3 wonderful forums i want to regularly contribute >> > to, i need 3 separate accounts on them. with wave (via federation) i just >> > need one and i'll see and contribute to all 3 of them, seamlessly. >> > i can also have automated tasks via robots and third party application >> > (mobile phone for instance) via the c/s protocol, and individual waves >> can >> > be integrated into regular web pages with custom components for each user >> > (i'm not 100% sure on this actually) >> > >> > for what i understand from your mail, all you want is to "extract" the >> nice >> > wysiwyg wave editor and add it to phpbb (for instance, or any other >> forum) >> > >> > for me it's a definitely no go because it trashes all the wave idea. >> > also, not to put all this burden on you, but i think your vision (shared >> by >> > many people) is the main reason why wave failed in first place. (please >> > don't take this as an aggression) >> > just my 2 cents =) >> > >> > D >> > >> > Il giorno 05 gennaio 2012 11:39, Max pane <your...@gmail.com> ha >> scritto: >> > >> >> Hi, >> >> >> >> i support this >> >> >> >> regards, >> >> jack john >> >> >> >> On Thu, Jan 5, 2012 at 12:29 PM, Doug <douglas.lin...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >> >> > Idly I was thinking today about things I liked about wave and things I >> >> > didn't and it struck me all the things I used wave for were the same >> >> thing >> >> > I used a forum for: >> >> > >> >> > You have multiple threaded conversions between groups of people, some >> of >> >> > which take place in public, some in small private groups. You can send >> >> > direct messages between individual users. >> >> > >> >> > The only real novel aspect of it was: >> >> > >> >> > - Rich document model for posts >> >> > - You have real time collaborative document editing >> >> > - You can share waves across multiple servers >> >> > - User submissions are verified using strong auth to prevent spoofing >> >> > - 'Bot users >> >> > - Gadgets >> >> > >> >> > Of these features, I feel no one ever did anything particularly >> >> interesting >> >> > with bots, gadgets or the real time editing... but the idea of a >> pretty >> >> > forum (rich editor~) you can participate in with anyone... that still >> >> seems >> >> > really cool to me. >> >> > >> >> > ...but, wiab isn't really thrilling anyone much at the moment. That >> >> hacker >> >> > news article got a few comments, but yeah... pretty much back to >> >> > silence-as-usual since then. >> >> > >> >> > I appreciate that the code in wiab is inherited from google wave, but >> >> > it's ridiculously over complicated. Under current is a hack to over >> come >> >> > the crazy-ness of the UI. >> >> > >> >> > Is anyone interested in going back to basics and rebuilding the wiab >> core >> >> > from scratch? >> >> > >> >> > With the objectives of: >> >> > >> >> > - A clean top quality, beautiful forum (aka. phpBB) with full forum >> >> > functionality in java using MVC principles. >> >> > - That permits waves (ie. threads) to be shared between server >> instances. >> >> > - With: >> >> > -- Strong crypto to authenticate users and user actions. >> >> > -- The full wave document model for each thread. >> >> > -- A minimalist javascript frontend for rich editing and otherwise >> server >> >> > side templates. >> >> > - Deployable on any compliant serlvet container >> >> > - Simple public interfaces for implementing persistence, attachments, >> >> > authentication, themes via plugins. >> >> > >> >> > And completely dropping: >> >> > - The wave api >> >> > - Robots >> >> > - Gadgets >> >> > - Concurrent editing >> >> > - An embedded hacked up version of jetty to run on >> >> > - The need for an XMPP server (as I understand it XMPP isn't actually >> >> > _used_ for anything) >> >> > - The overweight javascript front end. >> >> > >> >> > This would massively cleanup the code base, and I'm sure that there >> are >> >> > parts of the wiab code base that could be pulled over to get this >> >> working. >> >> > >> >> > ... the question I guess is, do people feel that would be too much of >> a >> >> > sacrifice to the wave spirit? >> >> > >> >> > Honestly I think the wiab code base is a lost cause at this point. >> >> > >> >> > ~ >> >> > Doug. >> >> > >> >> >>
