[jdev] Websockets RFC: stream: prefix required or not?
christian.schudt at gmx.de
Mon Feb 2 19:36:49 UTC 2015
I agree, Strophe.js behaves incorrect.
Examples are provided in http://xmpp.org/rfcs/rfc6120.html#streams-ns-content
"both styles are acceptable since they are semantically equivalent"
Even the „stream“ prefix could be any other, but most server implementation probably can’t deal with it.
Am 02.02.2015 um 20:24 schrieb Florian Schmaus <flo at geekplace.eu>:
> On 02.02.2015 18:39, Michael Weibel wrote:
>> Hi all,
>> MongooseIM currently sends stream:features as „features“ for websockets connections and strophe.js doesn’t recognize this currently.
>> How I read the RFC is that both behaviours (stream:features or just „features“) are correct:
>>> Note that for stream features and errors, there is no parent context
>>> element providing the "stream" namespace prefix as in [RFC6120], and
>>> thus the stream prefix MUST be declared or use an unprefixed form:
>>> <stream:features xmlns:stream="http://etherx.jabber.org/streams">
>>> <bind xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:xmpp-bind"/>
>>> -- OR --
>>> <error xmlns="http://etherx.jabber.org/streams">
>>> <host-unknown xmlns='urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:xmpp-streams'/>
>> I think the example in the RFC is not perfect, it should instead show the format for both cases and I think that’s also the source of confusion.
>> What is your opinion on this? Is MongooseIM or Strophe.js’ behaviour correct?
> Doesn't this come down to the question if
> <foo:bar xmlns:foo="http://foo.org">…</bar>
> <bar xmlns="http://foo.org">…</bar>
> are equivalent?
> And it appears to be that they are. So I'd say that strophe's behavior
> is not correct.
> JDev mailing list
> Info: http://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/jdev
> Unsubscribe: JDev-unsubscribe at jabber.org
More information about the JDev