[Council] Re: VOTE: JEP-0073 (Basic IM Protocol Suite)

Peter Saint-Andre stpeter at jabber.org
Wed Dec 1 15:56:57 CST 2004


In article <stpeter-9E5614.12191601122004 at sea.gmane.org>,
 Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter at jabber.org> 
 wrote:

> In article 
> <E6B928D2-41AA-11D9-B337-000A95984138 at box5.net>,
>  Thomas Muldowney <temas at box5.net> wrote:
> 
> > The Introduction history lesson almost made me miss the final bit about 
> > what the JEP really does.  While this could be nice for people that 
> > don't know the order of events, people that read this JEP might already 
> > know all of that and end up skipping the crucial bits.

I've moved the history lesson to a footnote.

> > Before I can vote I also need clarification on this sentence in Section 
> > 2:
> > 
> > (note that this entire JEP applies to software implementations, not 
> > necessarily to particular deployments thereof)
> > 
> > I understand the intent, but in practice it seems to horribly break 
> > things.  It means I'm using a stamped basic level client to try and 
> > connect to a stamped basic server, but then bam, things aren't working. 
> >   What happens when a deployment doesn't have disco, or I'm expecting 
> > in-band registration to exist?  It just seems like this could 
> > potentially damage a user experience, and create headaches for 
> > developers that are trying to work with this JEP which ties all the 
> > other techs into one heading.  Is it too idealistic to state that 
> > claiming Basic IM Suite means you actually provide it all?
> 
> That proviso really applies only to in-band registration, and perhaps 
> also to jabber:iq:auth. The point of protocol suites is to get software 
> up to snuff. Exactly which features a given deployment enables is 
> something that's really up to the user or admin (heck, if it's 
> open-source, I could hack the code to disable certain things, no?). But 
> it probably would be good to specify precisely the scope of that word 
> "necessarily" in the text, or refer to a later section, or just strike 
> the reference to deployments.

I've taken the last approach: deleting the offending text.

http://www.jabber.org/jeps/jep-0073.html (version 0.9)

/psa



More information about the Council mailing list