[jdev] Reproducability of XEP-0115: Entity Capabilities - 5.3 Complex Generation Example

Stephan Maka stephan at spaceboyz.net
Mon Apr 21 16:50:09 CDT 2008

Yann Leboulanger <asterix at lagaule.org> wrote:
> > Why isn't the hidden field FORM_TYPE appended to S? Exclusion of
> > hidden fields is not mentioned.
> it is appended, it's the first one

Ah yes, I implemented it but didn't saw it when wondering
afterwards. :-)

> > Why do "http://jabber.org/protocol/caps " and
> > "http://jabber.org/protocol/muc " include a trailing white-space,
> > opposed to their representation in the Service Discovery result?
> I don't see any space, but I don't see where in the disco resutl there

Look again. I can't even reproduce with the SHA-1 method given in
% echo -n 'client/pc/el/Ψ 0.9.1<client/pc/en/Psi 0.9.1<http://jabber.org/protocol/caps <http://jabber.org/protocol/disco#info<http://jabber.org/protocol/disco#items<http://jabber.org/protocol/muc <urn:xmpp:dataforms:softwareinfo<ip_version<ipv4<ipv6<os<Mac<os_version<10.5.1<software<Psi<software_version<0.11<' | openssl dgst -binary -sha1 | openssl enc -nopad -base64
% echo -n 'client/pc/el/Ψ 0.9.1<client/pc/en/Psi 0.9.1<http://jabber.org/protocol/caps<http://jabber.org/protocol/disco#info<http://jabber.org/protocol/disco#items<http://jabber.org/protocol/muc<urn:xmpp:dataforms:softwareinfo<ip_version<ipv4<ipv6<os<Mac<os_version<10.5.1<software<Psi<software_version<0.11<' | openssl dgst -binary -sha1 | openssl enc -nopad -base64 

> is cps support. It's not in the features. Why is it in the S string?

Because it is required. Perhaps this is a bug in the XEP?

> I have another question about this example:
> how is it possible that the field ip_version which has no type (so
> should be considered as text-single according to XEP-0004) can have
> several <value> elements?

BTW, ip_version is no standardized field of XEP-0232 (Software


More information about the JDev mailing list