[Council] JEP question
Powell, Jim (EER)
PowellJF at navair.navy.mil
Tue Aug 7 14:44:41 CDT 2001
You know, I have been thinking about that myself. I think it would make
more sense if they used the namespace that they will be using in the end.
Helps to keep 2 groups from coming up with a namespace name that gets
stepped on. Basically it would help with planning and accounting.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: David Waite [mailto:dwaite at jabber.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, August 07, 2001 6:37 PM
> To: council at jabber.org
> Subject: [Council] JEP question
> I am curious what others think - should proposals be limited to using
> 'draft' namespaces different than their final namespace?
> For instance, I have been working on a new conferencing protocol for
> quite some time (see http://jabber.org/?oid=1538), which currently
> specifies that it uses the jabber:iq:conference and jabber:x:invite
> namespaces - should it instead declare its own namespaces and
> have the
> namespaces used switch when/if it is formally accepted?
> -David Waite
> Council mailing list
> Council at jabber.org
More information about the Council