Hi Tad What you say is ok, if Server send back transformed delta to client.
Current client/server specs says client will receive an ACK with resultant delta version. But you are right, non client side OT is possible if you accept a round-trip latency to wavelet host and reduntant computable data transmission. I agree with you WAVE without OT is not WAVE REST proposed by Torbe Weis could be a nice way. And it could be implement using any script language on any regular web server as OT itself does not have big computational requirement really, as I said on a previous email maybe we need to isolate Wave Server from OT Jesus Salas wave-vs.net On 8 ago, 17:04, Tad Glines <[email protected]> wrote: > The console client is an example where OT is only performed in the server. > Once the console client has sent an operation to the server, it cannot > perform or send any other operations until the server has transformed and > applied the current operation. While the client doesn't have to perform OT, > it still has to create deltas and apply deltas. And, it's interactivity is > limited to the latency of one delta round-trip to the wavelet host and back. > Not, that's not round trip to the server, but round trip to the wavelet > host. > > Instead of trying to eliminate OT from the protocol, a better approach (as > others have mentioned) would be to provide an easy to use library/framework > for performing common conversation operation, implemented in C/C++ with > wrappers for most common languages, and example clients implemented in each. > Given that, plus an easy to install server, the uptake would probably > accelerate. > > -Tad > > > > On Sun, Aug 8, 2010 at 12:53 AM, Joel Dietz <[email protected]> wrote: > > On a technical note, I've never quite understood why OT needs to be > > performed on both the server and client, except the presumed latency between > > one and the other. Are there circumstances and/or potential implementations > > where OT would only have to be applied in one or the other (presumably the > > server)? If so, that would reduce the overhead necessary for future code > > releases. > > > If anyone could explain that to me I'd much appreciated it. > > > On Sat, Aug 7, 2010 at 10:51 PM, Joseph Gentle <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> On Sat, Aug 7, 2010 at 5:13 PM, Brett Morgan <[email protected]>wrote: > > >>> Patrick, > > >>> OT and version control systems serve very different masters. By that I > >>> mean you wouldn't want to use the merge system of version control systems > >>> for Wave, just as you would not want to use OT for managing source code > >>> history. > > >>> The reason is simple, to steal a line from one of the Wave team, OT is > >>> too good. OT's merge never fails. > > >>> In version control systems you, as a user, rely on the merge failing to > >>> highlight areas that need human intervention. In wave we don't want humans > >>> to have to constantly be involved in handling the real time merge of the > >>> disparate change streams. > > >>> brett > > >> This is one of the fantastic use cases of having different OT semantics > >> for different types of data. > > >> - For code editing, I want the current wave OT algorithm > >> - For code merging (ie, merge my changes with yours) I want edits on close > >> regions of the document to create conflict markers. > > >> (I think) it should be a reasonably easy change. > > >> -J > > >> -- > >> 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]<wave-protocol%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com> > >> . > >> For more options, visit this group at > >>http://groups.google.com/group/wave-protocol?hl=en. > > > -- > > 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]<wave-protocol%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com> > > . > > For more options, visit this group at > >http://groups.google.com/group/wave-protocol?hl=en.- Ocultar texto de la > >cita - > > - Mostrar texto de la cita - -- 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.
