[Standards-JIG] Re: JEP-45 MUC - Language of discussion and fields standardization

Peter Saint-Andre stpeter at jabber.org
Wed Sep 29 03:25:51 UTC 2004


In article <ciidr2$5o9$1 at sea.gmane.org>,
 "Gaston Dombiak" <dombiak_gaston at hotmail.com> wrote:

> Hey all,
> 
> According to the field standardization the muc#roominfo FORM_TYPE should
> include the field 'muc#roominfo_lang' which means 'Natural Language for Room
> Discussions'. The problem is that muc#owner FORM_TYPE no longer defines that
> field. So the question is which form is incorrect?
> 
> Thanks,
> 
>   -- Gato

Section 9 of the JEP clearly states:

******

Note that the configuration options shown below address all of the 
features and room types listed in the requirements section of this JEP, 
but that the exact configuration options and form layout shall be 
determined by the implementation or specific deployment. Also, these are 
examples only and are not intended to define the only allowed or 
required configuration options for rooms. A given implementation or 
deployment MAY choose to provide many additional configuration options 
(profanity filters, setting the default language for a room, message 
logging, etc.), which is why the use of the jabber:x:data protocol is 
valuable here.

******

So naturally you can define your own configuration options if you want, 
or you can send them directly to the Jabber Registrar (c'est moi) for 
inclusion in that FORM_TYPE. We can also include them in the JEP if 
people think that's valuable (which it may be for things that are also 
included in the muc#roominfo FORM_TYPE -- and probably it would be good 
for us to explicitly map some muc#owner fields to muc#roominfo fields).

/psa




More information about the Standards mailing list