15 Mar
2024
15 Mar
'24
7:14 a.m.
I have similar views to Dave and Daniel on this.
This specification is not needed to fill any gaps in the protocol, it is
quite easy to refer to "non-stanza top-level elements" or "non-stanza
stream-level elements" without inventing a new word for them. We have
enough jargon floating around without making things impenetrable to new
users and if I were to write more XEPs in the future I would not use
this word, standardized or no.
Writing technical specs is all about clear communication. Inventing new
words for the sake of saving a few characters of typing (but let's
ignore the inevitable citation to this document that would be necessary
on every single first use of the word in another XEP) is not doing
anything to make our communication clearer, instead it's just one more
thing you have to read before you can understand any other spec that
references it.
—Sam
On 3/10/24 11:18, Daniel Gultsch wrote:
This message constitutes notice of a Last Call for
comments on
XEP-0360.
Title: Nonzas (are not Stanzas)
Abstract:
This specification defines the term "Nonza", describing every top
level stream element that is not a Stanza.
URL: https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0360.html
This Last Call begins today and shall end at the close of business on
2024-03-25.
Please consider the following questions during this Last Call and send
your feedback to the standards(a)xmpp.org discussion list:
1. Is this specification needed to fill gaps in the XMPP protocol
stack or to clarify an existing protocol?
2. Does the specification solve the problem stated in the introduction
and requirements?
3. Do you plan to implement this specification in your code? If not,
why not?
4. Do you have any security concerns related to this specification?
5. Is the specification accurate and clearly written?
Your feedback is appreciated!
_______________________________________________
Standards mailing list -- standards(a)xmpp.org
To unsubscribe send an email to standards-leave(a)xmpp.org
--
Sam Whited
sam(a)samwhited.com