[standards-jig] comments on JEP-0060

Peter Millard me at pgmillard.com
Fri Jan 17 22:18:15 UTC 2003


Tijl Houtbeckers wrote:
> "Matthew A. Miller" <linuxwolf at outer-planes.no-ip.com> wrote
>> I can see your point on the difference between "Nodes MUST be
>> *configured* using x-data" and "Nodes MUST be *configurable* using
>> x-data", though.

I agree with this point and will re-phrase accordingly.. What I wanted to to
convey was:
* Any node configuration available MUST be done using the x-data protocol.
What this means is that in some cases of pubsub, a node MAY not have any
configuration. In those cases, the server MUST respond to the iq-get for the
config form with an error-501: Not Implemented.

> As PGM stated the x:data form can be *any* x:data form. Basically that
> means it's only humanreadable.
[LATER]
> I don't see how x:data is machinereadable unless you have some very
> fancy AI or if you know exactly wich fields are in the form. If you
> standardize on wich fields to use (from what PGM says this is not the
> case I think) why use x:data at all?

What are you talking about? Doesn't strcmp work anymore?? I don't recall
implying that var names for the x-data fields could never be fixed. Like
JoeH said, if we establish a standard for naming var's in these xdata forms,
then it's completely machine readable. In addition, do you forsee components
or other automated process which set specific configuration options for a
node, or do they just request instant nodes, etc... Please present me with
some use-cases and I'll be happy to take them as input into the design
process of this protocol (which everyone wants). Also, we have yet to
establish the process for where things like var attributes in x-data forms
get documented... Maybe they should be documented in the JEP.

> I don't see why my PubSub server should have the ability to
> communicate with humans. Sure it's nice on some occasions but why
> make it a requirment? And why would the Council want to restrict my
> choices like that?

What the heck are you smoking?? There is no requirment that says that your
pubsub impl MUST "communicate" with humans. The requirement is that a node
be configurable (discussed above), and that configuration must use the
x-data protocol so that it can be presented to humans when desirable to do
so. I just don't see the need to create yet another protocol for describing
a generic data set (which is what any configuration DTD/schema would look
like for pubsub). I don't proclaim to know ALL of the possible
configurations for a pubsub system.. Do you??? Using x-data is the only
real-world solution we have for solving the configuration options problem
TODAY.

Also regarding the "communicate with humans" issue... People have been
clamoring for pubsub implementations that clients can start to utilize. I
want to be able to publish an avatar, web news, my pgp key, web service
pointers, etc... Why would humans never want to interact with a pubsub
system???? This is not what every jabber list and website has been saying
for the past 18 months. If you're talking about _YOUR_OWN_ implementation,
then lock down the creation of nodes to specific JID's and respond to
configuration requests with an iq-error.

As soon as I get some more IRL bandwidth, I'll be working on a new revision
of the JEP with the change noted above as well as some other comments I've
received.

pgm.




More information about the Standards mailing list