> > Having an RFC would indeed be great. > > As an RFC author, I can tell you that we're a long way from an RFC. :) > > > There is a large discussion on the wave preview about the client/ > > server protocol. > > Unfortunately, there is much talk but little code so far (or I somehow > > missed it) > > Protocols aren't code, they are specs that anyone can code to. For > instance, that's how Google Talk implemented their XMPP-based service in > the first place.
True, a spec is not code. However, specs which are not backed by (at least experimental) implementations are typically a pain in the a**. That's why we use TCP/IP today and not the full bunch of ISO/OSI protocols. A typical weakness (or strength?) of open source projects is their inability (or unwillingness) to follow the process of "specification first, code later". A specification is useless if you cannot find people who are enthusiastic about implementing the spec. To create such enthusiasm you either need a brilliant spec on a very hot topic or the people specifying are the same ones who are implementing. In a company and academia the rules are different of course. However, when I see open source projects which generated endless discussions and wish lists but no code then I am always very sceptic. Torben --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
