[Standards] private storage revisited

Peter Saint-Andre stpeter at jabber.org
Mon Jul 9 01:44:26 UTC 2007


Joe Hildebrand wrote:
> Sigh. One of the goals of PEP was that it was supposed to be easy to
> implement on the clioent side.

True. Unfortunately, one of the features of the XSF standards process is
that it's based on consensus, with Council approval for changes to Draft
standards. In this case, that seems to be moving us away from a simple
solution (one person's beautifully simple solution is another person's
evil hack). We already have one such solution/hack in PEP: the +notify
namespaces used in entity capabilities to signal that a subscriber wants
to receive notifications related to a given namespace. Your suggestion
of +whitelist (etc.) is in the same spirit, but +notify does not force
semantic structure on NodeIds, which +{access_model} does (and the
objections may arise because NodeIds are supposed to lack semantic
structure).

I agree that this solution lacks elegance. But given it may be the best
we can do.

Peter

-- 
Peter Saint-Andre
XMPP Standards Foundation
http://www.xmpp.org/xsf/people/stpeter.shtml

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature
Size: 7354 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
URL: <http://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/attachments/20070708/89569307/attachment.bin>


More information about the Standards mailing list