[Standards] Namespaces, specifications, and protocol life cycles
dave at cridland.net
Tue Sep 9 17:23:10 UTC 2008
On Tue Sep 9 17:04:32 2008, Jehan wrote:
> But there is a very interesting point also: currently a feature
> gives its version (as far as I can remember). You only have a
> for core XMPP (in the opening stream tag), but not for the
> features inside the stream.
To make this useful, you'd need major/minor versioning - so 1.1
implementations were safe talking to 1.5, but the 1.5 implementation
would have to "talk down".
I did briefly contemplate suggesting this, before I realised that I'd
never implement it in a million years, and the knock-on effect in
terms of complexity of protocol design was so huge I'd never forgive
So don't go there, really. :-)
FWIW, there is a version in XMPP like this, yes. There is also a
version in MIME like this, which has remained at 1.0 for the past
couple of decades, and similarly shows no intention of changing.
Dave Cridland - mailto:dave at cridland.net - xmpp:dwd at dave.cridland.net
Infotrope Polymer - ACAP, IMAP, ESMTP, and Lemonade
More information about the Standards