[standards-jig] comments on JEP-0060

David Waite mass at akuma.org
Fri Jan 17 20:39:07 UTC 2003


Matthew A. Miller wrote:

>I would disagree that x:data makes JEP-0060 less generic.  It is a
>design decision, but a decision is necessary.  Nodes need configuration,
>and x:data does a fairly handy job of it. Some LCD (lowest common
>denominator) needs to be agreed upon, or there will be little hope for
>interoperability.
>
>IMO, x:data is a good LCD.  x:data is a good balance between
>human-readable and machine-readable requirements, it's Jabber-centric
>(as is this Pub/Sub spec), it's "ACTIVE", and it's supported by a fair
>number of clients and components.
>  
>
I think the big problem is the difference between being readable and 
understood by machines. x:data does not have a standard for mapping 
fields to expected values in a machine sense - human entry is needed 
enter a form, even when software might know all the values needed. This 
is because the requesting software cannot identify how to format those 
values for correct interpretation by the software component expecting 
them (unless it parses the instructions and field labels).

-David Waite




More information about the Standards mailing list