7 Jan
2026
7 Jan
'26
9:47 a.m.
On Tue, 6 Jan 2026 at 18:01, Philipp Hörist <philipp(a)hoerist.com> wrote:
Hi,
On Tue, Jan 6, 2026, at 18:10, Dave Cridland wrote:
Right, but simply supporting the reporting element "somewhere" isn't
a
feature that drives a behavioural change. So advertising it doesn't mean
clients can do something - you need to advertise a usage of it.
I understand that advertising a feature does serve the purpose of simply
advertising - that is, literally marketing - but the core feature of
feature advertising is feature negotiation, and that's perfectly
satisfied by the current XEP.
So all we could do - if we wanted - is to make it clearer *in the namespace
name* that this one is for reporting in blocking. But that's a breaking
change for something that's really just cosmetic.
The feature is specific to reporting via blocking
already. Section 3
begins:
Entities that support Service Discovery
(XEP-0030) [2] and abuse
reporting using the blocking command as defined in this
spec MUST respond
to service discovery requests with a feature of 'urn:xmpp:reporting:1'.
There's no behaviour associated with the report syntax except for
blocking, so
it doesn't need another feature.
I would hesitate before suggesting that one XEP should add a "sub
namespace" to another's, I think that could get very confusing very fast.
If we had another consumer of reports, then we'd have another feature
for that
mode of consumption (or production, I suppose).
Yes im aware that this generic namespace is specific for functionality
with blocking command now.
I think the text regarding that is clear enough in the XEP.
But i think its a missed chance to choose a namespace that semantically
makes more sense. Clearly separating the definition of the generic element,
from the implementation in a specific context.
On Tue, Jan 6, 2026, at 18:06, Stephen Paul Weber
wrote:
I agree with everything except this. Why is it
insufficient to say "if
you
support both blocking and reporting then you
support reporting in
blocking" ?
I wrote insufficient, when i believed it was intended that other future
XEPs also are supposed to announce urn:xmpp:reporting:1, but it seems the
author is aware and it was intended that no other XEP can announce this
feature, because it is bound to blocking command.
Regards
Philipp
_______________________________________________
Standards mailing list -- standards(a)xmpp.org
To unsubscribe send an email to standards-leave(a)xmpp.org