Personally, i think the client API would be a bad idea to drop. We could
probably live without it but it'd be nice to have especially for symmetry
with the http client api coming in SE8/EE7 as well.
On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 7:59 PM, Danny Coward <danny.coward_at_oracle.com>wrote:
> Thanks Scott and Greg.
>
> So its looking like we will drop the extensions SPI for this version.
>
> What do others feel about the client API ?
>
> Thanks,
>
> - Danny
>
>
> On 11/1/12 3:15 PM, Greg Wilkins wrote:
>
>
>
> On 25 October 2012 12:16, Danny Coward <danny.coward_at_oracle.com> wrote:
>
>> The support for extensions in the Early Draft includes support for web
>> socket extensions in two ways:-
>>
>> 1) The ability to list installed extensions by name, and provide an
>> extension matching algorithm in the opening handshake. (see e.g.
>> ServerEndpointConfiguration)
>> 2) The ability to create a (portable) web socket extension written in
>> Java, and to install it in any JSR 356 implementation. (see, e.g.
>> Extension, FrameBuilder)
>>
>
>
> I see that most extensions are going to be between browser implementations
> and server implementations. I see very little need for application
> provided protocol extensions ( which is almost an oxymoron!)
> So deferring 2 is good - maybe even indefinitely.
>
> cheers
>
>
>
>
> --
> Greg Wilkins <gregw_at_intalio.com>
> http://www.webtide.com
> Developer advice and support from the Jetty & CometD experts.
>
>
>
> --
> <http://www.oracle.com> * Danny Coward *
> Java EE
> Oracle Corporation
>
--
You can find me on the net at:
http://antwerkz.com http://antwerkz.com/+
http://antwerkz.com/twitter http://antwerkz.com/github