[Council] namespaces as HTTP URIs

[Joe Hildebrand]

http://jabber.org/protocol/gc/owner/1.0 is my favorite.

-- 
Joe Hildebrand

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Peter Saint-Andre [mailto:stpeter at jabber.org]
> Sent: Monday, October 07, 2002 12:39 PM
> To: council at jabber.org
> Subject: Re: [Council] namespaces as HTTP URIs
> 
> 
> OK, I will volunteer for JEP 45 to be the testing ground 
> here. Now, what
> is the desired format? I currently have 3 namespaces in there:
> 
> 1. jabber:gc:owner
> 2. jabber:gc:admin
> 3. jabber:gc:user
> 
> Any suggestions on the new namespaces? Here are some possible formats:
> 
> http://jabber.org/protocol/gc/owner
> http://jabber.org/protocol/gc-owner
> http://jabber.org/protocol/gc/owner/1.0
> http://jabber.org/protocol/gc-owner/1.0
> 
> Personally I think we might want to use separate version numbers as is
> done in XSLT, and not overload names by having gc-owner or 
> whatever. So
> I would prefer the following:
> 
> http://jabber.org/protocol/gc/owner
> http://jabber.org/protocol/gc/admin
> http://jabber.org/protocol/gc/user
> 
> Or 'muc' instead of 'gc' to align with the JEP name...
> 
> Thoughts?
> 
> Peter
> 
> --
> Peter Saint-Andre
> Jabber Software Foundation
> http://www.jabber.org/people/stpeter.php
> 
> On Mon, 7 Oct 2002, Thomas Muldowney wrote:
> 
> > I think the very recent JEPs should use this, such as MU-Chat, but I
> > don't think we need to force it on the slightly older ones that are
> > potentially already being played with in clients.  As to 
> point 2, yes =)
> > 
> > --temas
> > 
> > 
> > On Mon, Oct 07, 2002 at 08:41:41AM -0500, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
> > > The sense I got from our meeting the other night is that, 
> going forward, 
> > > we would prefer all namespace declarations to be URIs 
> (specifically HTTP
> > > URIs). So I'm thinking that anything we vote to Draft 
> from now on must
> > > express namespaces as http://www.jabber.org/protocol/blah 
> rather than
> > > jabber:*:* as we've done until now.
> > > 
> > > Two questions:
> > > 
> > > 1. Shall we enforce this on the JEPs that I will send to 
> the Council soon
> > > (server-based privacy rules, feature negotiation, and 
> multi-user chat)?
> > > 
> > > 2. Shall I add something about this to JEP-0001 and the 
> JEP template?
> > > 
> > > My answer is yes to both, but I'd like to get consensus 
> on this from the
> > > Council before proceeding.
> > > 
> > > Peter
> > > 
> > > --
> > > Peter Saint-Andre
> > > Jabber Software Foundation
> > > http://www.jabber.org/people/stpeter.php
> > > 
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Council mailing list
> > > Council at jabber.org
> > > http://mailman.jabber.org/listinfo/council
> > 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Council mailing list
> Council at jabber.org
> http://mailman.jabber.org/listinfo/council
>