[Council] JEP-0050: 4-Part vs 2-Part

Matthew A. Miller linuxwolf at outer-planes.no-ip.com
Tue Apr 29 17:42:52 CDT 2003


It had been suggested that JEP-0050 would be "better behaved" by
changing to a 4-part process for each stage of a command execution:

c:      iq-get; command/@node
s:      iq-result; x:data "form";command/@status='executing'
c:      iq-set; x:data "submit";command/@status='executing'
s:      iq-result; x:data "result";command/@status='executing'

c:      iq-get; command/@node;command/@status='executing'
s:      iq-result; x:data "form";command/@status='executing'
c:      iq-set; x:data "submit";command/@status='executing'
s:      iq-result; x:data "result";command/@status='executing'

...

c:      iq-get; command/@node;command/@status='executing'
s:      iq-result; x:data "form";command/@status='executing'
c:      iq-set; x:data "submit";command/@status='executing'
s:      iq-result; x:data "result";command/@status='completed'

as opposed to the currently documented 2-part process:

c:      iq-set; command/@node
s:      iq-result; x:data "form";command/@status='executing'

c:      iq-set; x:data "submit";command/@status='executing'
s:      iq-result; x:data "form";command/@status='executing'

...

c:      iq-set; x:data "submit";command/@status='executing'
s:      iq-result; x:data "result";command/@status='completed'

The primary reasoning that seems to have been used is that the latter
"is not in the spirit of x:data", while the former is. 

In my opinion, the former overly complicates the entire process for no
appreciable gain. The former implies the command could be complete by
this stage, which is may or may not be true.  The former also breaks up
the flow into too fine of a granularity, adding additional layers and
traffic.

Looking for user scenarios where the former is necessary, I cannot find
them.  In every user scenario I can come up with, the results are not
available until the command is completed.

If a viable reason why the former process must be done, I'll acquiesce
on this point.  Until then, I see no point to do this.

-- 

Matt "linuxwolf" Miller
JID:	linuxwolf at outer-planes.net
E-MAIL:	linuxwolf at outer-planes.net

- Got "JABBER"? (http://www.jabber.org/)




More information about the Council mailing list