[Standards-JIG] JEP-0060 PubSub: ModifyingNode/Collection Associations and other issues.

Peter Saint-Andre stpeter at jabber.org
Wed May 31 21:45:40 UTC 2006

Hash: SHA1

Bob Wyman wrote:
> Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
>> What if we say that a NodeID MAY have semantic meaning but
>> MUST NOT encapsulate hierarchy?
> 	The kind of "semantics" which most known to be problematic relates
> to hierarchy -- i.e. the duplicates or potentially conflicts with other
> mechanism provided by JEP-0060. Thus, I would be much happier if at least
> hierarchy-related semantics were banned from NodeIDs.
> 	However, I'm a bit uncomfortable about other kinds of semantics.
> Could someone help me here by providing examples of non-hierarchical
> semantics that would be encoded into NodeIDs?

The examples in JEP-0163 seem appropriate. They have semantic meaning
but are not hierarchical.

>> But doesn't "tag:wyman.us,2005:blog" itself have semantic meaning?
> 	I believe that a tagURI only *appears* to have semantics. That
> apparent semantics is simply an artifact of the tag minting procedure.
> RFC4151 clearly states that tagURI's "can only be used as identifiers". The
> RFC defines no case in which a consumer of tagURIs should treat them as
> anything but "simply strings of characters".

You make a good point, it's been a while since I looked at RFC 4151.


- --
Peter Saint-Andre
Jabber Software Foundation

Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (Darwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature
Size: 3641 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
URL: <http://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/attachments/20060531/f151066f/attachment.bin>

More information about the Standards mailing list