> Will Google be defining a document naming convention? I can see all sorts of
> name collisions without one.
I'll defer to Alex: "We'll be publishing more details about how Google
structures conversations on top of multiple documents soon."
> Is there a (possibly assumed) document size limit?
The protocol spec currently doesn't specify this. However, the next
revision of the spec will include support for coded error messages
including one encouraging a remote server to stop sending so much
data, or that the document they are working on is too large.
> Can I nest elements? For example:
> startElement("p")
> characters("this is an example of ")
> startElement("b")
> characters("bold")
> endElement()
> characters(" text.")
> endElement()
You sure can - as long as it results in well-formed XML.
> As far as I can tell, the only way for a remote server (or client) to obtain
> the current version of a wavelet/doc is to reconstruct it from the history.
> This seems like it would be suboptimal in cases where a wavelet has a large
> history. Am I missing something?
It's important for you to request the entire history as each delta
will be signed by the originating party. If you optimise the process
by sending a snapshot (which you might want to do from server to
client, depending on your trust model) you lose the ability to verify
that a wavelet was actually written by its claimed author.
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Wave
Protocol" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/wave-protocol?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
