the great idea was create this this thin waste uh to try and and allow the lower layers of the network to evolve and also allow the upper layers of the network to evolve separately and only have this very small protocol in between that will mediate how the whole network will grow

Webpacker has become a slimmer wrapper around Webpack

The WebSocket Protocol is designed on the principle that there should be minimal framing (the only framing that exists is to make the protocol frame-based instead of stream-based and to support a distinction between Unicode text and binary frames). It is expected that metadata would be layered on top of WebSocket by the application Fette & Melnikov Standards Track [Page 9] RFC 6455 The WebSocket Protocol December 2011 layer, in the same way that metadata is layered on top of TCP by the application layer (e.g., HTTP). Conceptually, WebSocket is really just a layer on top of TCP that does the following: o adds a web origin-based security model for browsers o adds an addressing and protocol naming mechanism to support multiple services on one port and multiple host names on one IP address o layers a framing mechanism on top of TCP to get back to the IP packet mechanism that TCP is built on, but without length limits o includes an additional closing handshake in-band that is designed to work in the presence of proxies and other intermediaries Other than that, WebSocket adds nothing. Basically it is intended to be as close to just exposing raw TCP to script as possible given the constraints of the Web. It's also designed in such a way that its servers can share a port with HTTP servers, by having its handshake be a valid HTTP Upgrade request. One could conceptually use other protocols to establish client-server messaging, but the intent of WebSockets is to provide a relatively simple protocol that can coexist with HTTP and deployed HTTP infrastructure (such as proxies) and that is as close to TCP as is safe for use with such infrastructure given security considerations, with targeted additions to simplify usage and keep simple things simple (such as the addition of message semantics).

The entire framework is based on small, clean Ruby structures that can be executed programmatically.

Instead of dealing with a mix of before_filters, Rack-middlewares, controller code and callbacks, an endpoint is just another activity and allows to be customized with the well-established Trailblazer mechanics.

While routing and redirecting/rendering still happens in Rails, all remaining steps are handled in the endpoint.

An endpoint links your routing with your business code. The idea is that your controllers are pure HTTP routers, calling the respective endpoint for each action. From there, the endpoint takes over, handles authentication, policies, executing the domain code, interpreting the result, and providing hooks to render a response.

In Trailblazer, models are completely empty. They solely contain associations and finders. No business logic is allowed in models.

Trailblazer extends the conventional MVC stack in Rails. Keep in mind that adding layers doesn't necessarily mean adding more code and complexity. The opposite is the case: Controller, view and model become lean endpoints for HTTP, rendering and persistence. Redundant code gets eliminated by putting very little application code into the right layer.

Trailblazer is no "complex web of objects and indirection". It solves many problems that have been around for years with a cleanly layered architecture.

Svelte components are a thin layer over the DOM and naturally expose the web platform. Coding in Svelte feels like I’m moving with the grain of the web.

It’s a good practice to try to keep intermittent contact with participants, even if you aren’t taking a measurement at that time, so that you’re less likely to lose track of them.

We also can use activities like member checking, another tool to support qualitative rigor, to ensure that our findings are accurately interpreted by vetting them with our participants prior to concluding our study.

Interviewing in-person allows you to capture important non-verbal and contextual information that will likely be limited if you choose to conduct your interview via phone or video.

This needs to be tempered with humility by allowing participants to show us if and how what we think we know about their community might apply to them as individuals.

If you do opt for this, make sure that you are not violating anyone’s right to privacy.

The researcher who schedules interviews with public assistance recipients to capture their experience after a legislation drastically changes their requirements for receiving benefits relies on the verbal data shared with them.

As such, as you go about recruiting for your qualitative studies, remember that people are made of multiple stories, of intersectional identities.