stpeter at gmail.com
Tue Aug 17 10:33:57 CDT 2004
On Tue, 17 Aug 2004 06:30:38 -0600, Matthew A. Miller
<linuxwolf at outer-planes.net> wrote:
> * Section 5 seems to imply that x:data is used instead of the built-in
> iq:register fields. If this is the intent, it needs to be explicitly
> stated. If this is not the intent, then I would like that section to
> contain language explicitly stating what takes presence (x:data form or
> iq:register fields).
A service could include both (iq:register for legacy clients that do
not support x:data) or x:data only (e.g., if "extended",
non-iq:register fields are required in the x:data form). If a client
understands x:data, then the x:data form takes precedence (i.e., the
receiving application must not mix and match iq:register fields with
> * Section 6 implies that x:oob is used instead of the iq:register
> fields. I would like this to be explicitly stated.
First, this section is non-normative. However, I think that in most
cases a given deployment would redirect potential registrants to a
website because it already has a provisioning system running via the
web and does not want users to register in-band via Jabber.
In fact this raises a further question of precedence. There are many
1. iq:register only -- process as defined in the JEP.
2. iq:register + x:data -- process only the x:data if you understand
it, otherwise process the iq:register fields (which are probably
included for "legacy" clients).
3. iq:register + x:oob -- not recommended; if received, process the
iq:register if you understand it, otherwise redirect to the URL
4. x:data + x:oob -- process the x:data if you understand it,
otherwise redirect to the URL
5. iq:register + x:data + x:oob -- not recommended; if received,
process only the x:data if you understand it; otherwise process the
iq:register if you understand it; otherwise process the x:oob
So x:data is always first in the processing order if you understand
it, iq:register is always second, and x:oob is always last.
If you don't understand any of these, you probably should not have
sent the IQ get in the first place. :-)
If this makes sense, I will adjust the text accordingly.
More information about the Council