On Fri, Feb 1, 2013 at 12:40 PM, Melvin Carvalho <[email protected]> wrote: > On 1 February 2013 12:25, Nick Jennings <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Sockethub is not trying to create "yet another protocol" or solution >> that requires a critical mass adoption before it achieves it's >> potential, but rather mitigate the effect that these competing >> protocols have on the users, and developers. One person can use >> Sockethub to it's full potential. I think that's a huge plus for the >> project, it's not trying to take on too much, just solve an important >> - specific - problem, and do it well. It can then be used as a >> building block for multiple use-cases, and approaches, to the bigger >> issues at hand. > > > Well it is 'yet another protocol' in terms of stitching together other apis > and providing your own. > > Scalability is the challenge where most projects stumble. > > http://xkcd.com/927/ > > See above :) Good luck!
I've seen that comic and love it :) I agree 100%. Sockethub has no intentions of trying to become a standard, nor would it make any sense, since it's a private interface. Like I said before, it makes more sense to think of it as a development library, who's interface happens to be through WebSockets (and therefore needs a method of data transport - ie. JSON) and can handle server-logic for unhosted web apps. There's no front facing standard, you can't connect and use a Sockethub instance unless you're authorized to do so. etc.
