[jdev] RE: [Standards] Re: compliance levels for 2008

Kevin Smith kevin at kismith.co.uk
Sat May 5 20:38:26 UTC 2007


On 5 May 2007, at 01:18, Chris Mullins wrote:
> 1 - Avatars.

We could have pep avatars come in as a dependency, but it does throw  
the requirement for PEP in there, and that means we should have PEP  
as a server dependency somewhere.

> 2 - Rich Messaging.

I've had a couple of issues with xhtml-im in the past, but I still  
think it's the way to go, for reasons other people have expressed  
more eloquently than me already. On the other hand, I'm not sure that  
xhtml-im belongs in here, someone try and persuade me otherwise, but  
at the moment I don't see this as a major part of IM for most people  
(compare to avatars, vcards or file transfer).

> 3 - VCards.

Probably fair.

> 4 - Bookmarks. This should be in the Intermediate Spec alongside MUC.

I don't have much complaint about this, if people think it should be  
required.

> 5 - XMPP IRI's.

I don't agree with this one, I think these /protocol/ compliance  
suites shouldn't address how the client interfaces with either the  
user or the operating system.

> 6 - We should require an XML Debug Window of some sort. Tie it to a
> standard Keystroke (Exodus, Pandion, and our new Communicator all use
> F12), so that it's practical to have a debug session with someone.  
> This
> should be in the Basic Spec.

Again, I don't think this is protocol. These are features users may  
care about, but they're the things the user can easily see on a  
checklist on the client's site; I think the cert suites are for the  
features a user can't easily check - primarily compliance to the RFC/ 
XEPs.

> 7 - We should require clients to support Start-TLS streams. This is an
> optional thing in the RFC, but clients really need to support it. This
> should be in the Basic Spec.

Clients probably do need to support this, yeah. I could probably be  
persuaded either way.

> 8 - Which MUC features do we want to require in the Intermediate spec?
> All of them? (Kick / Ban / Voice / Configure / History / 1:1->MUC,
> invites, etc) Or just the basic ones?

1:1->MUC's a thorny issue, but the rest, yeah.

> - An Install and uninstall mechanism that works with the target O/S
> - A means to quickly and easily report a bug against the client.
> - A means to upgrade the client from one version to another.

I'm not keen on any of the above, for reasons I've covered already:  
they're not relevant to a client's compliance. For a "Best client  
awards", possibly (although as noted earlier these are of varying  
relevance on different platforms), but not for XMPP compliance.

> - File transfer. Come on guys! :)

Assuming you mean 96, yes, I do think this belongs in intermediate.

> ... that's some food for thought. Opinions?
Now more mails to reply to :)

/K

-- 
Kevin Smith
Psi XMPP Client Project Leader (http://psi-im.org)






More information about the Standards mailing list