[Standards-JIG] Re: UPDATED: JEP-0081 (Jabber MIME Type)

Jacek Konieczny jajcus at bnet.pl
Tue Jan 18 18:20:18 UTC 2005

On Tue, Jan 18, 2005 at 11:13:46AM -0700, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
> Actually, I think it would be better to just include an XMPP URI in the 
> application/jabber+xml file. 
> That way, we don't hard-code use cases into the schema, and you can 
> support any use cases that can be encoded into an XMPP URI. Thus, the 
> Jabber MIME type simply provides a way to get around bad browers and 
> operating systems that make it prohibitively hard to add support for new 
> URI schemes.

Are there really such browsers? When the two standards are defined on
some browsers support one and some the other, then what should
a webmaster use to publish JIDs? Both? That seems insane. Which one
should then the user click? Wouldn't he be confused? 

I just want to be able to make a _single_ link with my JID on my web
page. And IMHO XMPP URI is the right way to go.


More information about the Standards mailing list