#394: WebSocketStream
Discussions
2019-07-17
David: any relationship to Web Transport?
Ken: we reviewed web sockets ... this address some issues TAG identified with existing APIs... everything to be streamable - this tackles that. They are doing some clean-up in the API as well...
(discussion of venue and it being early stage work)
Hadley: feels early for us to engage. Is there related work we should link to?
Ken: also related to web transport... mentioned in the explainer as web transport may supercede this.
Dan: Agree with Hadley, not clear how we should engage given that it's somebody's private repo + google doc with no chosen venue.
Dan: Let's bump two weeks and wait for responses.
2019-10-29
David: looked at issue, not sure whether it's worth more now or waiting (per Adam's comment)
Hadley: How are they doing an origin trial if there's no draft spec?
(some discussion of origin trials and continued changes to specs)
Peter: could close and ask to reopen when they have more
David: or alternatively maybe I should look a little more now... 2 weeks?
2019-11-26
David: Adam suggested maybe we should look at it later. We might want to do a breakout at the f2f
2020-08-31
Dan: this came out of the Abyss... Should we close it?
Ken: it's behind a flag in Chrome
Sangwhan: no other browser seems to care about it?
Ken: let's do a ping and ask for an update?
Dan: can we ask what the crossbrowser support story is? Also what's the venue and the intended venue?
Yves: nothing since April on their repo.
Ken: not sure it's a Fugu thing.
Ken: moz standards position ... seems positive...
Sangwhan: but has that position changed?
Ken: people seem to agree it's worth prototyping.
Sangwhan: I was positive... but given that web transport is coming this seems a little interim. And given that other browsers don't seem to be active in implementing this could be transitional.
Ken: Mozilla put this as part of the web transport framework... They closed their standards position issue...
Ken: Oh it was about Web Transport: https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/167#issuecomment-684545844
[bump to the 14th?]
2020-09-14
Ken: no update - from 13 days ago
Dan: for other issues that have "timed out" we've closed them... Maybe give them one more chance?
Ken: I will also ping Alex Russell
2021-05-Arakeen
Ken: we should close.
Dan: they're going to come back to us when ...
Ken: when they get cross-browser buy in.
[closed]
OpenedJul 11, 2019
こんにちはTAG!
I'm requesting a TAG review of:
Further details:
We recommend the explainer to be in Markdown. On top of the usual information expected in the explainer, it is strongly recommended to add:
You should also know that...
This proposal is still in the early stages. I plan to implement it in Blink to gather feedback, but we won't necessarily ship it. There will be an origin trial to gauge interest from developers.
We'd prefer the TAG provide feedback as (please select one):
Please preview the issue and check that the links work before submitting. In particular, if anything links to a URL which requires authentication (e.g. Google document), please make sure anyone with the link can access the document.
¹ For background, see our explanation of how to write a good explainer.