[standards-jig] No Subject....

Dave Smith dizzyd at jabber.org
Wed Feb 6 18:01:08 UTC 2002


On Mon, Feb 04, 2002 at 04:49:03PM -0500, Mike Lin wrote:
> > Yes.  Hence, I have moved the discussion of JNG to another thread.  With
> > regard to JEP 0017, I think our original discussion still stands: there are
> > difficult problems here and it may just not be worth addressing without a
> > willingness to consider alternatives to Jabber's "pure XML" approach...
> > Will a stopgap XML framing effort pay off and be adopted?
> 
> There are real benefits to new implementations (such as Jabber.NET and
> Jabber for embedded devices) from having JEP-0017-style framing
> information available, since it makes XML Stream interpretation much
> easier.

After a considerable amount of contemplation, I'm going to just go ahead
and concede the point. While I don't agree with the approach, that
doesn't make the approach _wrong_. 

*Dizzy eats his hat*

The most important thing is that no matter what the framing protocol,
everything is interoperable. Jabber can (and should) move beyond a
single implementation and mindset (as Iain pointed out). 

Mike, my apologies for "dissing" an idea before giving it a chance.

Now, I don't think I would like to see this JEP reach a "standard"
status -- it seems more fitting to term it as "informational" or
something. There will certainly be other framing approaches, and it
might be in our best interest to not necessarily push one or the other,
but instead just document them all and ensure that they can interoperate.

Diz



More information about the Standards mailing list