[Standards] certification etc.
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