/lists.whatwg.org/pipermail/whatwg-whatwg.org/2010-March/025694.html

https://github.com/whatwg/whatwg.org · HTML · 88 lines · 74 code · 7 blank · 7 comment · 0 complexity · c328fa1deedb12a3549ea0e5c17ecd51 MD5 · raw file 

    

  1. <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
    2. 

  2. <HTML>
    3. 

  3.  <HEAD>
    4. 

  4.    <TITLE> [whatwg] WebSocket bufferedAmount includes overhead or not
    5. 

  5.    </TITLE>
    6. 

  6.    <LINK REL="Index" HREF="index.html" >
    7. 

  7.    <LINK REL="made" HREF="mailto:whatwg%40lists.whatwg.org?Subject=Re%3A%20%5Bwhatwg%5D%20WebSocket%20bufferedAmount%20includes%20overhead%20or%20not&In-Reply-To=%3C63df84f1003292319m6dc167boe77cb30d1d1a9fa9%40mail.gmail.com%3E">
    8. 

  8.    <META NAME="robots" CONTENT="index,nofollow">
    9. 

  9.    <META http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
    10. 

  10.    <LINK REL="Previous"  HREF="025644.html">
    11. 

  11.    <LINK REL="Next"  HREF="025704.html">
    12. 

  12.  </HEAD>
    13. 

  13.  <BODY BGCOLOR="#ffffff">
    14. 

  14.    <H1>[whatwg] WebSocket bufferedAmount includes overhead or not</H1>
    15. 

  15. <!--htdig_noindex-->
    16. 

  16.     <B>Jonas Sicking</B> 
    17. 

  17.     <A HREF="mailto:whatwg%40lists.whatwg.org?Subject=Re%3A%20%5Bwhatwg%5D%20WebSocket%20bufferedAmount%20includes%20overhead%20or%20not&In-Reply-To=%3C63df84f1003292319m6dc167boe77cb30d1d1a9fa9%40mail.gmail.com%3E"
    18. 

  18.        TITLE="[whatwg] WebSocket bufferedAmount includes overhead or not">jonas at sicking.cc
    19. 

  19.        </A><BR>
    20. 

  20.     <I>Mon Mar 29 23:19:33 PDT 2010</I>
    21. 

  21.     <P><UL>
    22. 

  22.         <LI>Previous message: <A HREF="025644.html">[whatwg] WebSocket bufferedAmount includes overhead or not
    23. 

  23. </A></li>
    24. 

  24.         <LI>Next message: <A HREF="025704.html">[whatwg] WebSocket bufferedAmount includes overhead or not
    25. 

  25. </A></li>
    26. 

  26.          <LI> <B>Messages sorted by:</B> 
    27. 

  27.               <a href="date.html#25694">[ date ]</a>
    28. 

  28.               <a href="thread.html#25694">[ thread ]</a>
    29. 

  29.               <a href="subject.html#25694">[ subject ]</a>
    30. 

  30.               <a href="author.html#25694">[ author ]</a>
    31. 

  31.          </LI>
    32. 

  32.        </UL>
    33. 

  33.     <HR>  
    34. 

  34. <!--/htdig_noindex-->
    35. 

  35. <!--beginarticle-->
    36. 

  36. <PRE>On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 2:33 PM, Ian Hickson &lt;<A HREF="http://lists.whatwg.org/listinfo.cgi/whatwg-whatwg.org">ian at hixie.ch</A>&gt; wrote:
    37. 

  37. &gt;<i> On Tue, 23 Mar 2010, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
    38. 

  38. </I>&gt;&gt;<i>
    39. 

  39. </I>&gt;&gt;<i> We (Opera) would prefer this too. I.e. to not impose details of the
    40. 

  40. </I>&gt;&gt;<i> protocol on the API.
    41. 

  41. </I>&gt;<i>
    42. 

  42. </I>&gt;<i> If we're exposing nothing from the protocol, does that mean we shouldn't
    43. 

  43. </I>&gt;<i> be exposing that the string converts to UTF-8 either?
    44. 

  44. </I>
    45. 

  45. While exposing the fact that strings are sent as UTF-8 does say
    46. 

  46. something about the protocol, I think it's still much more protocol
    47. 

  47. independent than including the message headers. The string has to be
    48. 

  48. serialized in some way, and it seems unlikely that any newly developed
    49. 

  49. protocol in the foreseeable future would use anything other than UTF-8
    50. 

  50. as serialization.
    51. 

  51. 

  52. I agree it's not perfect, but few things we do are :)
    53. 

    54. 

  54. My understanding of the use case for bufferedAmount is to allow an
    55. 

  55. application to send large amounts of data without incurring large
    56. 

  56. amounts of latency. For example that you could send streams of mouse
    57. 

  57. movement coordinates without risking a high delay between a movement
    58. 

  58. and the information of the movement hits the wire.
    59. 

  59. 

  60. It seems to me that bufferedAmount does fulfill that use case, whereas
    61. 

  61. simply a boolean 'hasBufferedData' wouldn't as well.
    62. 

    63. 

  63. / Jonas
    64. 

  64. </PRE>
    65. 

  65. 

  66. 

  67. <!--endarticle-->
    68. 

  68. <!--htdig_noindex-->
    69. 

  69.     <HR>
    70. 

  70.     <P><UL>
    71. 

  71.         <!--threads-->
    72. 

  72. 	<LI>Previous message: <A HREF="025644.html">[whatwg] WebSocket bufferedAmount includes overhead or not
    73. 

  73. </A></li>
    74. 

  74. 	<LI>Next message: <A HREF="025704.html">[whatwg] WebSocket bufferedAmount includes overhead or not
    75. 

  75. </A></li>
    76. 

  76.          <LI> <B>Messages sorted by:</B> 
    77. 

  77.               <a href="date.html#25694">[ date ]</a>
    78. 

  78.               <a href="thread.html#25694">[ thread ]</a>
    79. 

  79.               <a href="subject.html#25694">[ subject ]</a>
    80. 

  80.               <a href="author.html#25694">[ author ]</a>
    81. 

  81.          </LI>
    82. 

  82.        </UL>
    83. 

  83. 

  84. <hr>
    85. 

  85. <a href="http://lists.whatwg.org/listinfo.cgi/whatwg-whatwg.org">More information about the whatwg
    86. 

  86. mailing list</a><br>
    87. 

  87. <!--/htdig_noindex-->
    88. 

  88. </body></html>
    89.