[Standards-JIG] JEP-0163: payload type vs. namespace

Jean-Louis Seguineau jean-louis.seguineau at laposte.net
Wed Sep 13 16:36:58 UTC 2006

Joe could you please illustrate what you mean, pls. Just re-using PSA's
examples. Thanks


-----Original Message-----
Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2006 02:32:00 -0400
From: Joe Hildebrand <hildjj at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Standards-JIG] JEP-0163: payload type vs. namespace
To: Jabber protocol discussion list <standards-jig at jabber.org>
Message-ID: <E5883178-5ED4-4573-AF5C-7DCED74DF58F at gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed

Another option in your Atom example is to use a more semantic- 
describing namespace rather than a syntactic-describing namespace.   
http://jabber.org/protocol/blog, http://jabber.org/protocol/releases,  
etc., all of which contain items in Atom format.

On Sep 12, 2006, at 2:31 PM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:

> Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
>> I'm a bit uncomfortable with principle #3 of JEP-0163 (PEP), which
>> states that there is one node per namespace. I think it's more  
>> accurate
>> to say that there is one node per payload type. This matters  
>> because we
>> could potentially use the same namespace for different payload types.
>> For example, the Atom format could be used for blog updates, new
>> releases, and who knows what else. But then it seems that perhaps we
>> need a registry of payload types?
> Well, another option (for PEP only, not generic pubsub) is to wrap the
> payload format (as we often do for x:data), for example:
> <blog xmlns='http://jabber.org/protocol/blogging'>
>   ... Atom content here ...
> </blog>
> <news xmlns='http://jabber.org/protocol/news'>
>   ... Atom content here ...
> </news>
> Etc.
> /me ponders
> Peter
> -- 
> Peter Saint-Andre
> Jabber Software Foundation
> http://www.jabber.org/people/stpeter.shtml

More information about the Standards mailing list