On Fri, Nov 13, 2009 at 3:01 PM, Ian Hickson <[email protected]> wrote: > On Fri, 13 Nov 2009, Jeremy Orlow wrote: > > > > I'm not very familiar with the IETF's efforts, but my understanding is > > that they were creating a competing protocol. Are they in fact creating > > something that they want to submit as a replacement to WebSockets? If > > so, why is WebSockets moving to last call? > > The IETF is just a bunch of open mailing lists, there's no "they" that > doesn't include us. >
Sorry I wasn't clear in my word choice. I'm actually on one of the lists, though I obviously don't follow it too closely. :-) The WebSocket protocol is pretty stable at this point. I doubt it will > change much. The recent IETF meeting indicated that most people agree that > we want something like WebSockets, and it has already received several > years of public review. > > I wouldn't worry about changing the schemes or anything like that; if the > protocol _does_ change in non-backwards-compatible ways, then we'll just > change the protocol to not step on this code. Just to be clear, you're saying that it's fairly unlikely that it's going to change in a backwards compatible way? I ask because there's not much time left to make such decisions before it goes into Chrome 4 without the "webkit-" prefix. And once that ship sails, there's not much of a point to adding it. J
_______________________________________________ webkit-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev
