[standards-jig] Namespaces

Iain Shigeoka iain.shigeoka at messaginglogic.com
Wed Aug 7 06:03:14 UTC 2002

On 8/6/02 5:24 PM, "Robert Norris" <rob at cataclysm.cx> wrote:

>> I have to say it's my opinion that we should leave Jabber the way it is
>> and just dump the whole "streaming document" paradigm in JNG, so that
>> each packet is a self-contained document. Like using XML structure for
>> framing, the "streaming document" looks nice on paper, but I think it's
>> just not worth it because it's too hard to do right. Anyway, I know this
>> is an unpopular position, so I won't push it further (for now).
> I agree completely. The time will come in the not-too-distant future
> where we will need to seperate the transport from the application.

I'll chime in with another +1 to punt to JNG.

Namespaces are definitely something we need to do right (thanks for bringing
it up yet again Diz... We need it done.).  However, its ugly ugly ugly with
the current Jabber setup.  I hate to punt to JNG again but IMO this is going
to break the "simple for client developer" promise too.   Perhaps the
namespaces deadline should be a JNG deadline?


More information about the Standards mailing list