But isn't creating a library basically the same as defining the client server protocol on a different abstraction layer? You do have a indirection but if the library gets accepted it is likely that it will influence all future development of a independent C/S protocol. What if the library is too Java specific and cannot be easily translated into different languages resulting in a protocol that is not general enough?
I think if you want interoperational clients you need to define a protocol first. Keep in mind that a protocol is far more then just the wire format of the messages passed along. I don't say you shouldn't try but sometimes it is better to take a step back before going ahead. Another question why are you so sure that Google will include this library code? Are you in any way associated with the wave development team? Regards Stefan 2009/10/12 Michael K <[email protected]> > > I am considering to take the FedOne client/server code, and separate > the client's communications layer into a library. If I can do that > cleanly, and if this gets accepted back into the codebase, then people > can start building prototype clients at least in java by linking > against this library. In that case they wouldn't need to worry about > the protocol details or wait for a proper C/S protocol to be > developed. > > If FedOne eventually would evolve into a reference server > implementation, and if the library would be maintained along the way, > then the library should work with other servers that are based on > FedOne. At least that's the theory - as you can see, there are some > ifs. > ... > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
