[standards-jig] disco category for clients
rob at cataclysm.cx
Fri Sep 12 00:31:11 UTC 2003
> > > Note well that these are client types, not connection types (WAP, GPRS,
> > > etc.). Also this category does not address situations such as connecting
> > > through a gateway (e.g., SMS). Those issues need more thought.
> > Is a catch all "external" or "unknown" type appropriate for this?
> Well, if I'm connected through an SMS gateway, who answers the disco
> request? The gateway? The server? Certainly not the client.
> > As a small aside, I'd still like a category/type for Jabber servers. I'm
> > still using "x-service"/"x-jabber" for j2, because nothing else fits.
> > The problem is that its kind of a category of one. Perhaps it would make
> > more sense to have a "im" category (rather than "gateway"), and under
> > that have "xmpp" for minimal XMPP-IM servers, "jabber" for Jabber
> > servers, as well as "aim", "icq", "msn" and "yahoo". That could be
> > ambiguous too though (since transports aren't exactly IM services).
> Yes, we need a server category, too. I would prefer not to change
> existing categories if at all possible. Perhaps "server/im" for
> something like jabberd2 -- there are other server types possible, as we
> know ("server/calendar", "server/email", and who knows what else). The
> distinction between xmpp servers and jabber servers seems less helpful
> to me, since that will effectively be discovered via stream negotation
> (if by xmpp server you mean a server that complies with the coming
Fair enough. server/im would suit me well. (Hell, anything except
x-service/x-jabber would suit me at this stage ;)
Robert Norris GPG: 1024D/FC18E6C2
Email+Jabber: rob at cataclysm.cx Web: http://cataclysm.cx/
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the Standards