[Standards-JIG] Re: Proposal for a solution to transport rosters

maqi at jabberstudio.org maqi at jabberstudio.org
Sun Sep 5 09:39:25 UTC 2004


On Sat, 4 Sep 2004, Justin Karneges wrote:

[Thread started on JDEV. Topic: A minimal XMPP extension to enable
transports to import contacts transparently. Backwards-compatible (clients
not supporting this see normal subscription requests). See
http://news.gmane.org/find-root.php?message_id=%3c200409041323.48275.james%40delx.cjb.net%3e
for the full thread. Please reply on standards-jig.]

>> So I'd really like to have some quick, simple, and backwards/
>> upwards-compatible solution which James' proposal seems to be. For now.
> The problem is that it is still something to be replaced later.  It's bad
> enough that we have existing protocols that we wish to supercede all the
> time, but do we really want to create protocols with the intent of replacing
> them?

We're talking about a single new "<import/>" tag here that goes into an
*existing* protocol. Therefore saying "creating a new protocol" is a bit
harsh I think ;-).

> Let's do it right the first time, please.

Neither roster management nor presence nor presence/roster integration is
nicely done in XMPP. Otherwise, these problems wouldn't even exist.
Nevertheless, I hope nobody suggests to retract XMPP.

> If the idea is that we will do it right and wrong simultaneously, by
> creating a JEP of the "right" way, and bypassing the JSF standards
> procedure with the "wrong" way, then I'll just wait for the JEP.

I'm not sure this needs to "bypass JSF standards". In case the additional
tag isn't in violation of XMPP-IM (I'm not sure it is), it should be
possible to submit an informational JEP?

Regards



More information about the Standards mailing list