>From a Wave discussion I started, this blip has been edited by myself and others to reflect various opinions and options. Not all opinions here reflect my own.
https://wave.google.com/wave/#restored:wave:googlewave.com!w%252B7hegIf3CF Client/Server protocol: XMPP versus JSON versus other Hi everyone. I want to make this specific Wave to tackle this specific issue. Most people seem to be favoring XMPP so far, but it would be nice to discuss the merits of each, and hopefully settle this issue early on. Both XMPP and JSON have their place already in the Wave world. XMPP is used for the federation protocol. JSON is used for the actual web client/server communication right now. However, that JSON is not an actual spec, and will surely be changed over time. To find out more information about the JSON used, I recommend using Firefox's Firebug to look at the requests and responses. When doing this, note that the JSON standard prefix of "}]}" should be ignored. Please share your thoughts of which you favor and why. I'll add a poll as well to the wave-protocol group, but please hold off on filling it out until you've thought things over thoroughly. I'm going to moderate this Wave, and remove chatty waves and put relevant content into this original blip. XMPP links: Google Books: XMPP O'Reilly XMPP site JSON links: PyGoWave (they are doing a client/server protocol themselves, and using JSON) XMPP Advantages: XML Based (almost anyone can parse it) Already in use in other Wave–related protocols reduces the quantity of things a prospective wave developer has to learn reduces the number of dependencies (at least for wave servers, the clients don’t care about the part that already uses xmpp) great for mini–servers, such as one might tie into an existing web application to integrate waves as a data model for discussion (forums, blogs with comments, so on and so forth) or as a new data model for anything else real–time and with multiple contributors (code editors, other crap?) Disadvantages: Can directly extend FedOne's code, so we’ll have to touch Java… and Google–written code… *shudder* JSON Advantages: Fairly efficient and compact, much more so than XMPP. Parsing tends to be faster as well. Already in use for existing wave client/server communication (but not in any usable form) Protocol Buffers Advantages: Most efficient, compact Disadvantages: Requires c++/Java/python libraries, meaning that other languages would need to re-implement the proto buffer Non-Readable(Binary) serialization/deserialization plus API. At Fri, 9 Oct 2009 11:46:01 +0200, Stefan Langer wrote: > > [1 <text/plain; ISO-8859-1 (7bit)>] > Thanks for the update! > > I'm not a fan of xml as I find it verbose and not so much fit for a lean > protocol but since XMPP is a standard and well understood it does sound like > a good candidate. Although I think generating the xml messages can be a pain > in the a... but with the help of JAXB and the like it wouldn't be as bad. > > What is the conses on Protocol Buffers as the default protocol. I must say > my experience is limited but I don't think that protocol buffers would be > the worst choice. > Are there any pros and cons listing on this matter? > > regards > Stefan > > 2009/10/9 Joe Developer <[email protected]> > > > The sad fact is that no progress seems to be made on wave, the public wave > > concerning this seems to function mostly as a soapbox/trollfest. > > > > Elliotcable, our walkin' talkin' dunning-kruger effect examplar waxes on > > about generated languages being evil and invites people to send him ideas > > while he works on his as-yet-to-be-published super protocol that will let > > him write the bestest wave client in objective-c for mac evah. > > > > Besides that XMPP still seems to be the most vociferously panned carrier > > protocol for the C/S protocol. How this is not putting the cart before the > > horse I don't know. > > > > > > > > On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 2:29 PM, Stefan Langer <[email protected] > > > wrote: > > > >> So what is the deal on this? > >> > >> Since I still do not have a wave account I'm kind of out of it and I would > >> like very much to see where this is heading and hopefully be able to > >> participate in it so would you people mind if we could bring this back to > >> the group? > >> I mean what is the purpose of a open protocol if the public is not allowed > >> to chip in? > >> > >> Regards > >> Stefan > >> > >> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > > [2 <text/html; ISO-8859-1 (quoted-printable)>] > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
