search

quicwg / base-drafts

Internet-Drafts that make up the base QUIC specification
https://quicwg.org
1.62k stars 203 forks source link

Is "to the encoder" intended? (comment 2) #4968

Closed LPardue closed 2 years ago

LPardue commented 2 years ago

Is "to the encoder" intended? Should this be "within the encoder" or might "contain" be made "limit" or something else?

Original:

   QPACK is designed to contain the more complex state tracking to the
   encoder, while the decoder is relatively simple.
MikeBishop commented 2 years ago

"Limit" is probably the closest if we want to keep the phrase as-is. Writing something de novo might be better, but I'm having trouble coming up with anything pithy.

LPardue commented 2 years ago

Some alternatives (aka throwing mud at the wall)

  1. "The design of QPACK requires an encoder to implement relatively more-complex state tracking than a decoder."
  2. "QPACK's design requires state tracking in various degrees of complexity. In relative terms, encoders have complex requirements, while decoders are more simple.
  3. "QPACK is designed to put the state tracking complexity onus on encoders, resulting in relatively simple decoders."
MikeBishop commented 2 years ago

I like the third one.

MikeBishop commented 2 years ago

Fixed in #4988 with a variant of the third option.