[Standards-JIG] Re: Ad-hoc Commands and nesting

Nolan Eakins sneakin at semanticgap.com
Tue Jan 25 07:16:51 UTC 2005

Hash: SHA1

Matthew A. Miller wrote:
| Trejkaz wrote:
|> My main issue with the JEP-50 spec is that at present, there isn't a
|> way specified to do branches at all.  So what it effectively says is,
|> "every item which comes back from the query is a command."  This is
|> dangerous if someone _does_ put branches in, because any client which
|> took this to be a way to optimise the number of queries they perform,
|> may attempt to execute a node which is not actually a command, but a
|> branch.
| If any of the items returned by the node
| "http://jabber.org/protocol/commands" are not "automation/command", it
| is a defect of that implementation.
| If the spec is not clear on this, it can be fixed.

He's suggesting adding another type so the commands can be nested. This
would mean more than just "automation/command".

Personally I wouldn't mind seeing commands under nodes other
"http://jabber.org/protocol/commands", though I do need to give the
service disco JEP another reading along w/ the adhoc commands to see
what is actually possible.

- - Nolan

Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org


More information about the Standards mailing list