[Standards] XEP-0060 version 1.1pre1
stpeter at stpeter.im
Thu Feb 14 16:42:03 UTC 2008
On Thu, Feb 14, 2008 at 11:22:09AM +0100, Ralph Meijer wrote:
> On Wed, 2008-02-13 at 11:57 -0700, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
> > Per recent list discussion, Ralph Meijer and I have provisionally
> > adjusted XEP-0060 (Publish-Subscribe) to cover the use case of
> > disassociating a node from a collection.
> > [..]
> I see the attribute to refer to the node being dis/associated is still
> called 'id', where I proposed 'node' for consistency with the rest of
> the spec.
+1, will fix.
> Furthermore, although you added <associate/> and <disassociate/> to the
> schema definition of <collection>, the elements themselves don't have a
> schema themselves.
Oops, I will fix that.
> The change for SHIM looks good to me, too. As I am looking into an HTTP
> gateway to XMPP pubsub, I am wondering about the names of the headers
> defined in this spec, though. They are very unlike other headers that
> registered with the XMPP Registrar and headers used in other protocols
> (HTTP, mail, news and MIME).
> RFC 3864 establishes the IANA registry of header fields and includes
> advice on header field naming. As most of the headers in the SHIM
> registry just point to their equivalent use in other protocols, I am
> wondering if we should follow suit and move our registry there, while
> adjusting the pubsub header fields to comply.
I try not to bother the IANA more than necessary. However I will think
about this. Is anyone actively using the headers yet? Will we break
backwards-compatibility if we modify the header names now?
More information about the Standards