[Standards] [Roster|Data] Versioning

Matthew Wild mwild1 at gmail.com
Thu Feb 19 23:54:09 UTC 2009


On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 10:17 PM, Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter at stpeter.im> wrote:
> Curtis King wrote:
>>
>> On 19-Feb-09, at 1:45 PM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
>>
>>> I don't think the bandwidth difference is that big here, but I like the
>>> idea of putting it in rfc3921bis so that more people implement it. ;-)
>>
>> +1
>>
>> Funny, I'm adding basic support for this right now.
>
> Super. I'll update XEP-0237 again so that it's closer to what was in
> version 0.3. :)
>

Looks like I need to update my implementation :)

I'm not really bothered by the format of the request. However I
wouldn't myself have recommended for it to go into the RFCs,
preferring to keep the core protocols as simple as possible. However
this is just my personal opinion, I have no technical reasons to back
it up :)

That said, where does the stuff we discussed at the summit about
fetching only particular roster groups for a session come in now? This
is something I could see going into the RFCs, tying in a lot more
closely with existing roster semantics.

Matthew.



More information about the Standards mailing list