[standards-jig] Checking for implementations

James Widman j-widman at cornellcollege.edu
Mon Apr 22 08:19:42 UTC 2002


How is it that these implementations started using 'jabber:iq:browse' without the council approving JEP 0011 first?
In the future, should implementations based on not-yet-approved JEPs use a namespace like 'exp:myNiftyNamespace' or 'jabber:exp:myNiftyNamespace'?
Does the Jabber community need namespace police and/or a naming convention for experimental protocols?
--James

Adam Theo wrote:
> DJ Adams wrote:
<snip>
>>   "Do we use a new namespace or not? There are people currently using
>>   browse as it is now..."
>>
>>   "Well, here's a short list: jabberd, JabberCOM, Winjab (etc)"
>>
>>   "Here are some more implementations..."
<snip>
> I say we re-name the namespace to something like "jabber:iq:browse2". 
> The only problem I see is that people will still try to use the old 
> "jabber:iq:browse" namespace because they don't pay enough attention to 
> the lists or docs to know the change took place.
> 


-- 
jabber:ns at neutralstone.net

For Loops: part of a balanced NP-complete breakfast.




More information about the Standards mailing list