[Standards] shared XML editing update

Fabio Forno fabio.forno at gmail.com
Mon Feb 4 23:57:06 UTC 2008

On Feb 4, 2008 9:52 PM, Joonas Govenius <joonas.govenius at gmail.com> wrote:

> The problem is that you need to create a "record" for each new DOM node
> that is added to the document. Therefore, if we want an instruction that
> adds its XML payload to the document, we need to specify a unique way of
> implicitly generating a record for each node in the payload. However,
> that seems error prone especially given that different DOM engines may
> parse the XML payload differently (e.g. I think IE ignores some
> whitespace nodes that Firefox doesn't).

Uhm, I don't think it's absolutely necessary. For example you could
select the node where to apply changes using an xpath query, e.g.: add
this node to /root/child1/child2[@name="spam"]. Moreover the
particular application could already provide explicit ids for nodes,
and the transport could use them. Basically what I'm saying is that
the application could decide to switch to a different transport if it
is more efficient and supported by both clients, but I think that
jingle will help a lot in this. Perhaps the protocol won't need
changes, just examples showing how to do the negotiation.

Fabio Forno, Ph.D.
Bluendo srl http://www.bluendo.com
jabber id: ff at jabber.bluendo.com

More information about the Standards mailing list