[Standards] About stream namespaces

Carlo v. Loesch CvL at mail.symlynX.com
Sat Mar 17 14:52:58 UTC 2007


Peter Saint-Andre typeth:
| Where were you in 1999 when we were defining XML streams? Where were you 
| in 2002-2003 when we formalized XML streams at the IETF? Obviously we 
| sure could have used your help...

Who gave a damn when around 1999 we pointed out that Jabber (IMPP/XMPP
whatever) was not going to scale well if it ignored the multiple
recipient problem?

Who said back then, that multicast presence is not necessary, because
the average user would only have ten people in his roster? Why does
XMPP have 60% presence overhead¹ today?

If XMPP is suboptimal today, there is a flaw in the process of
decision-making.

We were there, willing to bring our 12 years of headstart over Jabber
into the design of XMPP, to make the best of it. In fact we are still
here, trying to make the world better. May sound cheesy, but it's as
simple as that.

So given the circumstances, excuse us if we are occasionally a little
angry.

¹) see http://about.psyc.eu/Jabber#Scalability if this figure is
   still news to you.

P.S. Concerning the choice of XML as a syntax in messaging protocols, enjoy
the dozen good reasons why that was a bad idea on http://about.psyc.eu/XML




More information about the Standards mailing list