[Standards] Proposed XMPP Extension: Roster Versioning
stpeter at stpeter.im
Thu Mar 6 21:13:15 UTC 2008
Curtis King wrote:
> On 6-Mar-08, at 12:50 AM, Justin Karneges wrote:
>> What counts as what is a matter of what the usual design practices and
>> are for related specifications.
> An other factor to consider is how most people actually implement a
> protocol. Guess what, it's not by reading the RFCs and XEPs in great
> detail ;-) It's by protocol examples either from tcpdumps or the
> specification itself and then testing against a common server or client
> until it "works". So, it's very common for someone to miss the fact some
> data should be treated as opaque. The best specifications define how the
> data should be interpreted.
Heh, true. Why do you think our specs have so many examples?
"We put the example in example.com!"
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 7338 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
More information about the Standards