Wave Federation Protocol Integration (API)

General discussion of development ideas and the approaches taken in the 3.x branch of phpBB. The next feature release of phpBB 3 will be 3.3/Proteus.
Forum rules
Please do not post support questions regarding installing, updating, or upgrading phpBB 3.2.x. If you need support for phpBB 3.2.x please visit the 3.2.x Support Forum on phpbb.com.

If you have questions regarding writing extensions please post in Extension Writers Discussion to receive proper guidance from our staff and community.
ToonArmy
Registered User
Posts: 335
Joined: Fri Mar 26, 2004 7:31 pm
Location: Bristol, UK
Contact:

Re: Wave Federation Protocol Integration (API)

Post by ToonArmy » Tue Dec 22, 2009 6:41 am

jwxie wrote:Hmmm I have mentioned G.W numerous times and have spoken about strong integration and API (I said build phpBB4 around them). I think they do see the big trend and will make the API extensions stronger, easier and more powerful.

But I don't think they are willing to make phpBB4 too customize (they want to leave these rich features to users to decide and to build). I guess?
This is the way to go about introducing an idea not asking philosophical questions.
Chris SmithBlogXMOOhlohArea51WikiNo support via PM/IM
Image

User avatar
DavidIQ
Customisations Team Leader
Customisations Team Leader
Posts: 1831
Joined: Thu Mar 02, 2006 4:29 pm
Location: Earth
Contact:

Re: Wave Federation Protocol Integration (API)

Post by DavidIQ » Tue Dec 22, 2009 6:47 am

ToonArmy wrote:
DavidIQ wrote:
marosell wrote:Please at least try to think outside the box ;)
I do try to think outside the box. But I also take into consideration Google's "excellent" track record for keeping private things private. I would like to be wrong of course but only time will tell I guess.
It's a protocol not a service from Google.
Well from the sound of it...
marosell wrote:If web site commenting systems and web forums were to integrate the Wave Federation Protocol, everyone could track everything they every posted ANYWHERE on the web in their Wave Platform.

Please reread that sentence: Everyone could track everything they ever posted ANYWHERE on the web in their Wave Platform.

[...]

Anyone with a Wave account can post to any phpBB4 on the internet without having to register a new username (like OpenID), and they could track all of their phpBB4 posts across all of their boards from their Wave account.
So it's a protocol to connect to a Google service? That's what it sounds like.
Image

ToonArmy
Registered User
Posts: 335
Joined: Fri Mar 26, 2004 7:31 pm
Location: Bristol, UK
Contact:

Re: Wave Federation Protocol Integration (API)

Post by ToonArmy » Tue Dec 22, 2009 6:49 am

DavidIQ wrote:So it's a protocol to connect to a Google service? That's what it sounds like.
Yes but you can implement it yourself totally disparate from Google, like I said it's a protocol. Don't judge it by what it sounds like. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Wav ... n_Protocol
Chris SmithBlogXMOOhlohArea51WikiNo support via PM/IM
Image

marosell
Registered User
Posts: 70
Joined: Sat Jun 03, 2006 9:56 pm

Re: Wave Federation Protocol Integration (API)

Post by marosell » Tue Dec 22, 2009 8:22 am

Thanks ToonArmy.

Yes, GWFP it is a protocol, just like how POP and IMAP are protocols for email. It's completely open source and completely independent of Google and their products, other then the fact that they have invested/planned it's first stages. I wouldn't go as far as to say it's a beta, but it is certainly in development. It's "intended to parallel the openness and ease of adoption of the email protocol so waves may succeed email as the dominant form of Internet communication".

You have to imagine it to be JUST LIKE EMAIL. Anyone will be able to run their own server and domain just like email, and believe me, there will be plenty of clients (ala gmail, live, yahoo, etc etc). Everyone's going to have their own. Different people will have their accounts on different wave providers, just like email.

So it doesn't have to "connect to google's service", even though right now, google pretty much has the first and only server running. "Google Wave" (as in the product that is at google.com/wave) is their own interpretation of what a wave client might look like, and is their service. It's the first wave client because they started the protocol and need a way to showcase it and use it, and yes, it's in beta.

I can't emphasize enough that this is NOT a google product; that this open protocol is going to become something very important. Like all new technologies, they can only become wide spread if people aren't afraid to try them out, and when I saw this 4.0 Discussion Forum here at area51, I knew that this would be a perfect time to discuss whether or not phpBB might want to seize this opportunity.

Here are the white papers on the architecture.

Additionally, if you want to give it serious, thoroughly researched thought, I'd strongly suggest watching the following video: Developer Preview

If you would like an invitation to Google Wave, shoot me a PM, I have a few left.

Also, please be sure to read this article that posted in the OP. Pay less attention to the fact that they mention instant messaging, and more attention to the fact that they mention the idea of "the thread" changing into a cross-platform idea called "the wave", which would essentially extend the possibility of posting to a phpBB4 board and retrieving said posts from other platforms over the same protocol.

igorw
Registered User
Posts: 500
Joined: Thu Jan 04, 2007 11:47 pm

Re: Wave Federation Protocol Integration (API)

Post by igorw » Tue Dec 22, 2009 11:16 am

I don't see why it would be so difficult to create an extension (or what are we calling them?) for phpBB4 which implements said protocol. It's based on XMPP (aka Jabber protocol) which btw is already partially supported by phpBB3 (for notifications). If you've seen the Wave videos you will have seen that they've managed to implement integration with twitter which does NOT support the wave federation protocol. Therefore, phpBB could even have some kind of SOAP based API that Wave could hook into.

My point: if it's built the right way, this kind of stuff will be so easy to add, it doesn't need to be built into the code of the product.

marosell
Registered User
Posts: 70
Joined: Sat Jun 03, 2006 9:56 pm

Re: Wave Federation Protocol Integration (API)

Post by marosell » Tue Dec 22, 2009 5:22 pm

eviL3 wrote:I don't see why it would be so difficult to create an extension... phpBB could even have some kind of SOAP based API that Wave could hook into... it doesn't need to be built into the code of the product.
Most true. And in fact, that may be the best way to do it. But, I definitely think building around it completely should be considered. This would mean a better degree of separation in the raw function of how a bulletin board works.

Ex: One of the biggest improvements in the way websites work was separating form from function: separating the data, the look, and the programming. Without the need to edit webpage files directly, the look of a website (CSS) is separated from the data (in turn kept in a database), which is in turn separated from web files like php files that managed the programing in between.

But using the mysql server (which just creates raw databases) means that the phpBB code base has to do ALL of the hard work in determining where everything goes. To me, this seems like a waste of time, code, sweat, and energy drinks. What if you could take most of the information thats in "the database", and instead of having to deal with storing posts, conversations, users, unique ID's for all of the above, if you just left it to something else? For instance, a wave server.

Instead of using a mysql installation, the phpbb entity could take full advantage of a wave installation. Let the wave server handle users and threads. Let all users that are registered board members become username@phpbb.wavedomain.com and let the wave server create and manage them, or let an alternate user from another domain be present. Let all threads become "waves" and let the wave server create and manage them.

Even personal messages could be waves. Forget PM's, and consider PC's, users should have a "Personal Conversations Inbox". There is absolutely no reason to have different programming for the forum threads and for private messages between two users, or for that matter, private threaded conversations between multiple users.

Escape the confines of how we interpret bulletin-board interaction today and consider that most everything that phpBB handles with painstaking code could be handled by this protocol. We finally have something that was meant to be used the way people use forums. It's there, and the hard work has been done. There's no need to reinvent what a conversation (or thread) "is" or how it's handled in every architecture every time we want to make a new version of phpbb.

Instead, we could spend our time on what's important: the interface.

"[Lets] build a modern forum solution based on what users want and need, in the most efficient, modern, and integrated way possible."

I like this, the idea that a bulletin board as a software package should be a "solution". Let our client be the solution, with the interface programing being the solvent, and a core based on a protocol solute. Lets remove the idea of "a thread" as we know it, and let phpbb4 be the best, most creative way of taking "cross-platform conversations" and displaying them in a community-driven bulletin-board-form, while adding features that are relevant to online bulletin boards like groups, forums to hold these conversations, and posting interfaces.
Last edited by marosell on Tue Dec 22, 2009 5:48 pm, edited 2 times in total.

code reader
Registered User
Posts: 653
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2005 3:01 pm

Re: Wave Federation Protocol Integration (API)

Post by code reader » Tue Dec 22, 2009 5:47 pm

marosell wrote:I definitely think building around it completely should be considered. This would mean a better degree of separation in the raw function of how a bulletin board works.
this may be the right strategy for a new forum software (and it might not: i do not know enough about it to have an opinion), but i find it hard to believe that this makes sense for phpbb4.

a discussion board based on this paradigm, at least as far as i understand, will not be a natural candidate for an existing phpbb board to upgrade to/migrate to.

i do not think this was stated clearly, but i do believe we all take for granted when talking about phpbb4, that we do not just intend to create "The Greatest Forum Software Ever Created" (tm) or somesuch.
we intend to create a good solution that will be a natural upgrade target for existing phpbb forums, complete with upgrade path (=converter, i guess).
it may not be "backward compatible", but we want to keep the migration path as smooth as possible, so current stylers and modders will not feel "left behind" or disgusted by a completely new paradigm.
in other words, we want phpbb4 to be "phpbb" in more than name only.

i do not think that basing a new forum software on what is discussed here is likely to meet this criteria.

it is almost inevitable that we'll lose part of the community. we did when going from 2 to 3 (although in this case it can be argued that the main point of contention was not the new system itself, but the EOL of phpbb2 that many felt was premature), but if we are likely to lose *most* of the community, then we should ask the question: why call this "Great New Thing" (tm) phpbb?
create a brand new one, and call it "NewWave" or "InYourFace", or "CyberSurf" or "Moby Dick 2.0" or whatever.

peace.

marosell
Registered User
Posts: 70
Joined: Sat Jun 03, 2006 9:56 pm

Re: Wave Federation Protocol Integration (API)

Post by marosell » Tue Dec 22, 2009 6:47 pm

code reader wrote:a discussion board based on this paradigm, at least as far as i understand, will not be a natural candidate for an existing phpbb board to upgrade to/migrate to.
Database routines an converters to grab threads, assemble them into waves, and throw them onto the wave server can be written. User migration would also be very possible. We could very easily format the way the conversations are displayed to resemble phpbb forums as we know them.
code reader wrote:we intend to create a good solution that will be a natural upgrade target for existing phpbb forums
This is where I disagree, and ties to previous technologies can arguably be blamed for frustrations during advancement. I think we should intend to create a good solution that will fall in line with new technologies as they present themselves, and present a product that will be able to keep up with new ways people intend to converse in internet communities. Just as 2.x was still available for development and download when 3.x was released, development can very easily continue on 3.x. But I feel 4.x is the opportunity to test new waters.
code reader wrote:why call this "Great New Thing" (tm) phpbb? create a brand new one, and call it "NewWave"
Well, for starters, because we intend to use "php" as a basis for the programming, and because it will be a bulletin board ;). But mostly because the phpbb community seems to relish new ideas. However, I do understand the desire to make sure people understand it's a different direction. I would not be opposed to discussing a phpBBWave "community sub-project" with the intent of researching the value of a Wave Server to a php-bulletin-board project as a whole. Developer experimentation with very basic wave integration concepts would be a very valuable tool in determining how useful Wave may or may not be.

Phil
Registered User
Posts: 185
Joined: Sun Mar 11, 2007 3:20 am
Contact:

Re: Wave Federation Protocol Integration (API)

Post by Phil » Tue Dec 22, 2009 7:05 pm

To be quite honest I think such a full implementation would not be in the best interest of the project if not only for the reasons described above. A forum based on such a design paradigm would be inherently different in both usability and function and would not be a natural progression for a project like this. To be frank, users choose phpBB over other solutions (threaded solutions, systems like Vanilla that focus on canonical categorising instead of forums, etc.) because they desire a solution that functions as a flat-display forum system.

While I have no objections to communicating with Wave servers using the WFP in addition to the standard forum paradigm via extensions written off a more pluggable architecture, writing a forum client that is entirely dependent on it, at this point in time, would not fit the bill at all.

Though ties to previous technologies may hinder future progression, there is also something to be said for those previous technologies -- the reason they still exist is because they work, and work well.

At some point, experimentation by some party to test Wave as a discussion-type system should be done, yes; however, I do not feel that phpBB4 is the time or place to do it. Perhaps success with extension to utilise the protocol (as above) could warrant further investigation in future releases.
My phpbb.com account
Note that any of my opinions expressed in RFC topics are my own and not necessarily representative of the opinion of the phpBB Team.

code reader
Registered User
Posts: 653
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2005 3:01 pm

Re: Wave Federation Protocol Integration (API)

Post by code reader » Tue Dec 22, 2009 7:27 pm

in general, i agree with iWisdom above.
i do not think it will be constructive to argue with marosell on a point-by point basis, but i will point to one difference in our approach:
marosell keeps referring to the technology used (as in: "it makes sense as the next phpbb because it will use php"), or referring to "ties to old technologies".
while i do not say technology is not important - after all, this is what we do, i was talking more about the user experience rather than the technology used.
at a certain point, if the user experience of using a tool becomes different enough, one should give the tool a new name rather than branding it with an n+1 version number.

there is a saying "you can prove anything by using an analogy", so do not read the following as attempt to "prove" my point, it's more an attempt to highlight it:
you do not brand an airplane "car 2.0".
it's something else.
it may be better, faster, more sexy, can do stuff the car can't, it may even be cheaper and more fuel efficient (for the sake of the analogy), but millions of drivers can not or do not want to become pilots.
and if they do, it just means cars will become obsolete, not that the airplane is "the next car".


peace.

Post Reply