[Standards-JIG] UPDATED: JEP-0055 (Jabber Searching)

Joe Hildebrand jhildebrand at jabber.com
Tue Mar 23 20:14:36 UTC 2004


As long as the schema doesn't *prohibit* elements from other 
namespaces, it should be ok.

-- 
Joe Hildebrand
Denver, CO, USA

On Mar 22, 2004, at 5:01 PM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:

> On Mon, Mar 22, 2004 at 03:52:41PM -0800, JD Conley wrote:
>> Do we really want to limit the extensibility to x:data?  It would be
>> nice if it the node could support any valid namespace.  A custom
>> application may want to include hierarchical data or a more simple
>> namespace than x:data.  Obviously this data would not be supported by
>> every client out there, but I think the protocol should be extensible
>> enough to allow it.  Same goes for disco. . .  Perhaps saying 
>> something
>> like "clients should support x:data forms for extensibility" would be
>> sufficient.
>
> In general, any Jabber XML *could* contain an extension at *any* point.
> The JEP defines through text where you *might* expect an extension, but
> it's friendly to put it in the schema, too, which is what we're talking
> about here. Custom applications could always define their own schemas
> rather than using the one from the JEP (which is only descriptive in 
> any
> case).
>
> /psa
>
> _______________________________________________
> Standards-JIG mailing list
> Standards-JIG at jabber.org
> https://jabberstudio.org/mailman/listinfo/standards-jig




More information about the Standards mailing list