[Standards-JIG] Proposed Changes to JEP-60 - PubSub

Peter Millard me at pgmillard.com
Thu Jun 3 22:47:09 UTC 2004


Joe Hildebrand wrote:
> Is it possible that some of the tightening could take place using
> JEP-68 registered field names in the node configuration form?

Matthew A. Miller wrote:
> That, and a set of pubsub-specific features (analagous to what MUC defines)?

Yes, this is exactly what I was saying.
If an application requires a specific feature on a pubsub server, it should do a
disco#info and check the <feature> elements. Once these are registered, it's all
machine readable. Combined with the JEP-68 field standardization, it allows
machines to also pre-configure nodes, etc.

The obvious initial choices as has been pointed out are:
- Hierarchy seperator
- Allow items to be over-written?
- etc..

pgm.






More information about the Standards mailing list