These are chat archives for csarven/ldn

16th
Jul 2016
Sarven Capadisli
@csarven
Jul 16 2016 14:21
The application/x-www-form-urlencoded format is in many ways an aberrant monstrosity, the result of many years of implementation accidents and compromises leading to a set of requirements necessary for interoperability, but in no way representing good design practices. In particular, readers are cautioned to pay close attention to the twisted details involving repeated (and in some cases nested) conversions between character encodings and byte sequences. Unfortunately the format is in widespread use due to the prevalence of HTML forms.[HTML]
+1 to LDN for not using application/x-www-form-urlencoded ? :)
Melvin Carvalho
@melvincarvalho
Jul 16 2016 14:23
:+1:
interesting link, thanks for sharing
Melvin Carvalho
@melvincarvalho
Jul 16 2016 14:36
@csarven Im breaking my implementation up into a sender (app) a receiver (modified but backwards compatible node solid server) and a consumer (robot) ... so the app is a game which will send your score to the server ... then the robot will pick it up in real time, validate it, process it, and then the app (or another consumer) who is listening on a websocket can get a real time notification and display it to the user
Sarven Capadisli
@csarven
Jul 16 2016 14:37
Wow, that's great! That'd be a great implemention to list in the spec.
Melvin Carvalho
@melvincarvalho
Jul 16 2016 14:39
The hardest part has been making a robust robot
I've decided to make a general purpose job processor with priority queue based on : https://github.com/Automattic/kue
Sarven Capadisli
@csarven
Jul 16 2016 14:39
@all LDN will be proposed to taken to First Public Working Draft (from current Editor's Draft) status in the next Social Web WG telco: https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/2016-07-19
Melvin Carvalho
@melvincarvalho
Jul 16 2016 14:40
:+1:
great work, it's a pity the group will end so soon, or we might have been able to publish more specs
Sandro Hawke
@sandhawke
Jul 16 2016 15:51
@melvincarvalho The group ending soon is just a symptom. The real problem is that there's virtually no interest in this kind of work, among business. If there were, we could extend or create a new group.
Melvin Carvalho
@melvincarvalho
Jul 16 2016 15:54
@sandhawke yes, it's a pity, because during the XG almost all the big social firms wanted to participate, in telecons at least, with boeing dropping out of the WG that leaves IBM as the major company I noticed, and I dont know if they would want to extend
Sandro Hawke
@sandhawke
Jul 16 2016 15:55
Possible reasons:
+++ 1. The industry changed, decided there was more money to be made without standards
+++ 2. The people changed, losing interest in a fad
(adding +++ to avoid markdown insanity)
+++ 3. This particular group turned out not to be where they wanted to be
Melvin Carvalho
@melvincarvalho
Jul 16 2016 15:57
:+1:
Sandro Hawke
@sandhawke
Jul 16 2016 15:58
which would your money be on? I think it's some of each.
Melvin Carvalho
@melvincarvalho
Jul 16 2016 16:02
A little of all of those has some truth I think. During the XG we had big names really pushing decentralization, Chris Messina, David Recordon, Jo Smarr, Brad Fitzpatrick and many others -- they were largely doing so independently and it had a lot of buzz -- over the course of time they were hired by the big companies with the hope of change from within. That hope never really emerged into much concrete as I think all had more pressing duties. The XG had 3 excellent chairs in danbri, dan applequist, and harry (in his prime) -- it was a vibrant and energetic group, I think one aspect was that the only deliverable was the final report and that tends to be be less polarizing as a work item. Also the landscape has changed alot from facebook being a small company to over a billion users. They are really far ahead of most of the work going on and pushing boundaries, so unsure of the incentives.
but i dont think decentralization is a 'fad'
I think it is balkanized