[Standards] roster schema

Tomasz Sterna tomek at xiaoka.com
Fri Jul 6 06:48:58 UTC 2007


Dnia 05-07-2007, czw o godzinie 16:49 -0600, Peter Saint-Andre
napisał(a):
> > If the server could handle and client knows it could handle, it could
> > use longer names.
> 
> How does the client know?

It tried to put a long name in a minute ago and it succeeded. 


> > "640KB SHOULD be enough for anyone."
> 
> We're talking about a handle for an IM contact or the name of a roster
> group here, not the functioning of a complete operating system. Get some
> perspective.

I'm giving you the perspective.

We'll defining standards for future use and we simply cannot envision
what will be the future requirements. Many tried and failed miserably.

Ergo - let's not introduce arbitrary restrictions where these are not
needed.
This is an implementation issue, so let the implementer and
administrator decide.


Your concern is clients failing roster sets.
Mridul recommended a MINIMUM though and I'm all for for it.
When you specify that server MUST handle at least 163 characters (yes
Unicode characters, not bytes - again this is an implementation issue),
then client authors could set the max limit on 163 and live perfectly
fine.



-- 
Tomasz Sterna
Xiaoka Grp.  http://www.xiaoka.com/




More information about the Standards mailing list