[Standards-JIG] Re: Historical XEPs
machekku at uaznia.net
Thu Nov 16 22:10:11 UTC 2006
Remko Troncon wrote:
>> How about the PEP-based XML storage?
> I still think that's a horrible idea. Private XML storage has nothing to
> do with eventing, and especially not with sending events to many users
> (which is what PEP is really for, regardless of the fact that there are
> ways to make nodes private etc.). What is the real motivation for doing
> it this way (except that we can?)
Old XML Storage fails when you want to store a list of items (like
bookmarks): you cannot easily add/remove one item. And more fun starts
when you have more then one connected resource. You don't know if other
instance changed something (because there are no event notifications).
Not to mention race conditions.
Yes, XML Storage doesn't need PEP: it just needs well-know PubSub node.
But if we already decided to have IM-PubSub for PEP, it doesn't make
sense to write another spec for private nodes and expect server
developers to implement it.
Maciek A: It's against natural order of reading.
xmpp:machekku at uaznia.net Q: Why is that?
xmpp:machekku at chrome.pl A: People answering above quoted text.
Q: What's the most annoying on newsgroups?
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 257 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
More information about the Standards