[Standards] shared XML editing update

Boyd Fletcher boyd.fletcher at je.jfcom.mil
Mon Feb 4 23:24:44 UTC 2008




On 2/4/08 6:19 PM, "Peter Saint-Andre" <stpeter at stpeter.im> wrote:

> Boyd Fletcher wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> but without a server process collisions are going to happen and resolving
>> them could be tricky. the whole weighting approach seems to risky. It relies
>> on the good behavior of the client way too much.
> 
> So we need to document the server mode for SXE.
> 

but the problem is inherent to the protocol design. in a server side
approach you don't need the complexity of the weighting.



>> also getting current state is extremely expensive and unreliable.  it relies
>> on another client to send it to you instead of a more reliable server.
> 
> No it does not. The server can send you the state, and in server mode
> that might be a MUST.
> 

if a server side SXE then yes.


>> I know of lot of large enterprise collaboration customers that would
>> disagree. 
> 
> We're not in the business of doing large market surveys or attempting to
> divine what people want. If those large enterprise collaboration
> customers wish to participate in our open standards process, they are
> welcome to do so. If they do not wish to participate (either directly or
> via "proxy" through the XMPP server vendors they work with), then their
> requirements will not be incorporated.

I would think we would be considered a very large enterprise collaboration
customer :)

> 
> As far as I can see, many large sessions would be 10 people making edits
> and 1000 people listening. It is possible that you could have 1000
> people making edits, but personally I think that would get extremely
> confusing very quickly, no matter how good your floor control system is.
> Maybe I'm wrong about that and I'm just making assumptions, but that is
> the kind of system I've been given to understand is more common.
> 
>> Any either case, why do we want to push out an approach that has
>> such a large potential problem. not to mention the ones described above and
>> other emails.
> 
> Which are unproven assertions. Let's see how far we can push SXE in the
> server-mode direction (so far not fully documented) before we make
> judgments about what is and is not workable.
> 
> Peter

you don't need to build an implementation of something to show that its got
issues. just examining the protocol can provide sufficient evidence.




More information about the Standards mailing list