Explainer updates/rewrite#183
Open
domfarolino wants to merge 4 commits into
Open
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
The explainer is LONG overdue for an update. It's outdated, longwinded, and overly-speculative, and could use some re-organization. We knew this, and we also got this feedback when Chromium was putting the API up for an Origin Trial.
This proposal slims down the explainer (
README.md), and removesdocs/explainer.mdanddocs/proposal.md, folding in all of the API design specifics into the main readme. It generally makes all of the prose in the explainer much more concise, and leaves anything roughly speculative to a new and improved "Open questions" section. There are some sections from the original readme that got outright cut:...because I found that they were mostly redundant with:
./docs/security-privacy-considerations.mdexplainer, which is still linked to from the main readme:The declarative API explainer is still separate, but linked to from the detailed design discussion.
Also much of the https://github.com/webmachinelearning/webmcp#model-context-protocol-mcp-without-webmcp and https://github.com/webmachinelearning/webmcp/blob/main/docs/proposal.md#intersection-with-mcp sections didn't make it over since they spoke much more as if WebMCP was nearly directly usable by MCP-supporting clients, but with discussions about streamable input/outputs, including transferable objects like
ReadableStreams and specific web platform APIs for user elicitation, it's not clear to me that we should portray ourselves as keeping in lock-step with MCP anymore than the basics.