[standards-jig] XML Conformance

Fabrice DESRE - FT.BD/FTRD/DMI/GRI fabrice.desre at francetelecom.com
Thu Jan 17 09:44:07 UTC 2002

> David Waite wrote:

> There are already a few places where prefixed namespaces are used
> (first
> which comes to mind is dialback, but also stream:stream) - in these
> cases
> the prefix has to be identical to the prefix within the definition or
> else
> no existing implementation can handle them. Is this more restrictive
> than
> the XML-names spec, or does it conflict?

 Is is not conformant IMHO.

> Another problem is that the interserver and intraserver protocols
> (jabber:server and jabber:component:accept) include message, presence
> and iq
> elements in their namespaces. This basically makes it so that you
> _cannot_
> use namespaces appropriately for any component which bridges between
> these,
> such as scm or ccm. For example, with CCM you will be sending users
> messages
> which look like:
> <message xmlns='jabber:component:accept' to='foo'
> from='bar'>...</message>
> If the server component does not correct for this, the clients cannot
> even
> support namespaces correctly.

 Agreed. And this shows one one the mistakes made while designing the
jabber protocol : the use of a mandatory default namespace to identify
the kind a communication. This should be a real attribute (eg 
type='jabber:client'). I don't know if <message/>, <presence/> and <iq/> 
need to belong to a different namespace. My bet would be to put them
under the eterx namespace.
 Does it sounds logical ?



Fabrice Desré - France Telecom R&D/DTL/MSV
Tel: +(33) 2 96 05 31 43
Fax: +(33) 2 96 05 32 86

More information about the Standards mailing list