[Standards] Re: compliance levels for 2008

Maciek Niedzielski machekku at uaznia.net
Mon May 7 19:30:30 UTC 2007


Justin Karneges wrote:
> On Monday 07 May 2007 11:54 am, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
>> Fletcher, Boyd C. CIV US USJFCOM JFL J9935 wrote:
>>> Perhaps that is too strict of a definition of a server. Users don't
>>> care how muc is implemented just so long as their "xmpp server"
>>> supports it.
>> Implementation is different from deployment. Compliance levels are for
>> software implementations, not service deployments.
> Hmm, but can't just about anything be componentized?  How would a MUC module 
> be distinct from, say, a StartTLS module in terms of compliancy?
And from the other side: some features in clients could be implemented
as plugins.

-- 
Maciek Niedzielski
 Psi developer, XSF member
 xmpp:machekku at uaznia.net
                               " BTW: We could use PEP for this ;) "



More information about the Standards mailing list