[Standards] Best approach for Shared XML editing

Yann Biancheri ybiancheri at wimba.com
Fri Sep 12 09:21:12 UTC 2008

Thanks for all these answerers! I didn't expect so much!
Would it be possible to share with us a newer  version of the  
whiteboard XEP. It's currently unclear how a client can join an  
ongoing whiteboard session and  how he would synchronize his state  
with the current whiteboard. There is a small section on history but  
it lacks stanza examples.
We are definitively targeting a server-side implementation of the  
whiteboard to helped with synchronization between participants, check  
that edit after edit, the document stays valid (in the xml sense), and  
right management. We also believe that whiteboarding would be used in  
a presentation mode where only a few occupants would be able to edit  
whereas 50 people might watch the document.
The whiteboard protocol is definitively less verbose than SXE and by  
such should scale way better with an appropriate conflict resolution  
approach. I'm particularly thinking at the initial state  
synchronization in SXE which can be pretty verbose.

We think that having a generic protocol for xml editing is nice, but  
our only use case right now is whiteboarding so we wouldn't mind  
having a whiteboard specific protocol.

Is it possible to have access at the whiteboard openfire plugin  
sources, or a documentation on what protocol exactly it implements.


On 11 sept. 08, at 19:21, Lirette, Keith J. CONTR J9C618 wrote:

> Our client can be downloaded from https://xmpp.je.jfcom.mil/1.4Final/
> The TransVerse client by itself provides 1-to-1 whiteboarding.  We  
> also
> have an OpenFire plugin that supports MUC whiteboarding.
> -Keith Lirette
> -----Original Message-----
> From: standards-bounces at xmpp.org [mailto:standards-bounces at xmpp.org]  
> On
> Behalf Of Bishop, Michael W. CONTR J9C880
> Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2008 1:13 PM
> To: XMPP Extension Discussion List
> Subject: Re: [Standards] Best approach for Shared XML editing
> Hello,
> We've done it with our proposed specification:
> http://www.xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/whiteboard2.html
> The date is incorrect; I don't think I changed it from the template I
> used.  This protocol started development in 2006.  While the document
> centers around SVG, it can be used with any kind of XML document.   
> We've
> been actively working against this protocol and have future versions  
> and
> protocol additions planned.  Currently, we've had success in test  
> plans,
> performance testing, and live deployments in numerous environments.
> Michael Bishop
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: standards-bounces at xmpp.org
>> [mailto:standards-bounces at xmpp.org] On Behalf Of Yann Biancheri
>> Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2008 11:44 AM
>> To: XMPP Extension Discussion List
>> Cc: joonas at uwc.net
>> Subject: [Standards] Best approach for Shared XML editing
>> Hi everybody,
>> We are looking at ways to implement whiteboarding over XMPP and we've
>> found lots of interesting proposals in the community already. We are
>> particularly interested in the sxe [1] and sxde [2] ones. It seems
>> that sxde has been written first and has leads to sxe. What we like
>> with sxde is that it is less verbose than sxe since you can directly
>> add an xml element qualified with it's namespaces, attributes,
>> contents whereas in sxe you would have to issue one command to create
>> the element, and one for each of the attributes which in the end
>> result in a lot of xml to send in the XMPP band. On the other hand,
>> sxe is more recent, seems cleaner and more generic.
>> We were wondering if there were any other reasons such as protocol
>> flaws behind the move from sxde to sxe?  Or if we could use one or  
>> the
>> other eitherway?
>> Thanks a lot for the feedback
>> - Yann
>> [1] http://www.xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/sxe.html
>> [2] http://www.xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/sxde.html

More information about the Standards mailing list