[Standards] "storage:*" namespaces
stpeter at stpeter.im
Mon Aug 27 15:50:39 UTC 2007
Jonathan Chayce Dickinson wrote:
> I kinda like the *:*:*:*... namespaces. jabber:* and storage:* are
> really exclusive to Jabber, and even if they are not any responsible
> developer should Google a new namespace first anyway: name clashes, not
> an issue. And they are short, concise, and *very* easy to remember.
> The only real way I see them being used is that the URI ones are
> self-describing, i.e. they refer to the XEP itself, which is nice,
> because some newbie developer can pick up up an XML document and
> instantly find the documentation. However, the *:*:*:*... namespaces
> describe functionality straight away, e.g. jabber:client and
> jabber:server, what could be more descriptive than that?
> And changing the namespaces will break a lot of existing code. Badly
> written code (like magic strings) which is unfortunately quite abundant
> will require changes in more that one class/module/whatever.
> So no, sorry, doesn't look like we can ditch the *:*:*:*... namespaces.
> Too much depends on it.
This is a non-issue -- I already posted to the list about retracting the
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 7338 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
More information about the Standards