Joe Gregorio wrote:
> The one thing missing from the analysis is the overhead, and
> practicality, of switching protocols (HTTP to XMPP).
I'm not aware of anything that might be called "overhead." What our
clients do is, upon startup, connect to XMPP and request the list of Atom
files that they are monitoring. They then immediately fetch those files to
establish their start-of-session state. From that point on, they only listen
to XMPP since anything that would be written to the Atom files is also
written to XMPP. HTTP is only used on start-up. It's a pretty clean process.
> Let's keep Atom as it is now explain to folks who need to keep up with
> high volume streams the two options they have, either streaming over
> XMPP or "next" links.
Where are these "next" links defined? I don't see them in the Atom
Internet Draft. The word "next" doesn't even appear in the ID... If they
aren't there, how can you call them "Atom as it is now"? I thought Henry
Story was proposing these as extensions.
bob wyman
