[Members] MOTION: JEP-0106 (JID Escaping)

CORVOYSIER David FTRD/DMI/REN david.corvoysier at francetelecom.com
Tue Mar 23 03:44:40 CST 2004

I am not too familiar with escaping mechanisms in general, so I won't 'second' neither say 'nay', but I tend to agree with richard on this: existing gateway implementations should not prevent us from using a standard mechanism.

Actually, the JEP-0100 is still experimental, and the following rule can still be modified:

"... The traditional convention in the Jabber community has been to replace the '@' character with the '%' character. Although we might not design such a method today, there is no good reason to define a new method that breaks backward compatibility; therefore, the traditional substition MUST be used" 

I think we _do_ now have a good reason for defining a better replacement for the '@' ...

But again, I am not an escaping guru, so these were only my two cents ...


> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : members-bounces at jabber.org 
> [mailto:members-bounces at jabber.org] De la part de Richard Dobson
> Envoyé : lundi 22 mars 2004 21:18
> À : JSF members discussion list
> Objet : Re: [Members] MOTION: JEP-0106 (JID Escaping)
> > On December 2, Council member Peter Millard motioned for a 
> Last Call 
> > on
> > JEP-0106:
> >
> > 
> http://www.jabber.org/pipermail/standards-> jig/2003-December/004460.htm
> > l
> >
> > Unfortunately, he sent his message to the wrong email list 
> (Standards 
> > JIG rather than Members). The motion was seconded by Paul Curtis on 
> > the Standards JIG list and by Rob Norris and myself on the Members 
> > list. Because of the confusion, I think it would be 
> advisable to poll 
> > the members of the JSF again regarding this JEP. Therefore as JEP 
> > Editor I am simply "forwarding" this motion to the Members 
> list again 
> > (Peter Millard is out of town this week so can't do this 
> himself). If 
> > you would like the JSF to issue a Last Call on this JEP, 
> please second 
> > the motion (Paul and Rob, don't feel that you need to do so 
> again). If 
> > you have concerns or objections to issuing the Last Call, 
> please raise 
> > them within the next 10 days.
> Still not convinced that we should not be using % as the 
> escaping specifier, surely we should stick with established 
> standards, its only legacy implementations that would be 
> affected by using % and all of those will need updating 
> anyway to conform with the new XMPP specs, why not update any 
> implementations using % at the same time.
> Richard
> _______________________________________________
> Members mailing list
> Members at jabber.org https://jabberstudio.org/mailman/listinfo/members

More information about the Members mailing list