[standards-jig] UPDATED: JEP-0121 (Initial Infobits Registration)

Peter Saint-Andre stpeter at jabber.org
Tue Dec 16 00:28:47 UTC 2003

On Tue, Dec 16, 2003 at 10:06:23AM +1100, Michael Brown wrote:
> > On Mon, Dec 15, 2003 at 07:37:08PM +1100, Michael Brown wrote:
> >> Peter,
> >>
> >> This looks like it is progressing nicely, but can you give us some
> >> background on how this mapping was reached?
> >>
> >> Why are all the vCard-temp fields not included?  What was the reasoning
> >> behind leaving some of them out?  (eg GEO)
> >
> > Hmm, I probably missed a few.
> Guess so.  It can't be that hard though - we copy them over from JEP-0054
> right?  ;-)

Um yeah. I started running out of time last night.

> > I specifically shied away from the geo
> > stuff until I get a chance to talk with people who know more about
> > geolocation than I do, since I want to make sure that we're capturing
> > all the information we need as defined in JEP-0080.
> I have to admit to not knowing a huge amount about it either, but in vCard
> it is basically just a set of GPS coordinates I think, with some
> indication of the margin for error?  This would just indicate the users
> home location.  I thought JEP-0080 was more for real-time data.  At least
> it does say:
> "[it]...does not supersede the more permanent data captured in a vCard
> (see vcard-temp [3]) or some other yet-to-be-defined entity profile
> protocol. "

Indeed. But I want to make sure that the infobits elements address all
the fancy geoloc stuff about the datum and so on. And the vCard format
does not include altitude.

> >> Can you give us a pros & cons of banning binary (BASE64) data for the
> >> logo/photo/sound fields? (Also the 'sound' tag seems a little generic to
> >> me, maybe 'audioname' or something?)
> >
> > Basically I tried to avoid inclusion of base64 data for now, since I was
> > concerned about size. I'll have to do some more research on the typical
> > size of logo/photo/sound files in vCard. Do you think my concern is
> > misplaced? I'm really not up on this enough to know yet...
> I'm not sure size is really a big concern when other JEPs are looking at
> in-band file transfer and socks5 servers.  I can't really see that a
> passport-sized jpg and a mono sample a couple of seconds in length can be
> that big, and the server could impose the size limits.  I know Matthias
> had some concerns about S2C/C2S sending BASE64.

It may not be a concern. But I need to do more research in order to do
that -- or more research than I had time for last night.


More information about the Standards mailing list