[Standards] certification etc.

Rachel Blackman rcb at ceruleanstudios.com
Thu Mar 29 17:22:49 UTC 2007

>> It feels to me like it would either be recommended in "XMPP Basic  
>> Server 2008" or required in "XMPP Intermediate Server 2008".
> I don't think it's really worth having recommendeds in the  
> certified protocol suites, because they don't mean anything - these  
> certifications are useful for determining what features a system  
> supports. If you look at a client which says "Implements Client  
> 2008 Basic", and Client 2008 Basic recommends XEP-76, you have no  
> idea if the client supports it or not - so what have you gained?

Actually... I think the only way a 'recommended' makes sense in a  
certification spec is if the 'recommended' is something that is going  
to be a 'required' next year.  Sort of an advanced 'heads-up, you  
might want to get started on this one or follow it.'

If we have 'recommended' in a spec, it should ONLY have meaning to  
developers as a road-map for what's ahead, in other words.   
Recommended in a spec should have NO meaning to outside users.  And  
since we're talking about having the spec for a given year ready six  
months ahead of time, I think 'recommended' may be redundant; six  
months is enough time to investigate and implement the new options.

Rachel Blackman <rcb at ceruleanstudios.com>
Trillian Messenger - http://www.trillianastra.com/

More information about the Standards mailing list