[Standards] Wording JID, FullJid, baseJID,...

Peter Saint-Andre stpeter at stpeter.im
Mon Jun 22 16:25:20 UTC 2009


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 6/22/09 10:21 AM, Ralph Meijer wrote:
> On Mon, 2009-06-22 at 13:30 +0100, Pedro Melo wrote:
>> On Jun 22, 2009, at 12:28 PM, Bernhard zwischenbrugger wrote:
>> [..]
>>> romeo 
>>>                                                                                // username
>> Node identifier.
>>
>> In some contexts username might be appropriate.
>>
>> [..]
>>
>>> <iq from="pubsub.example.com" node="something">   // jid+node
>> Not sure what you mean here. This is not even a valid stanza. There is  
>> no "node" in the top level <iq />
> 
> What Bernard means in the latter case is that publish-subscribe requests
> and service discovery requests are targeted at a node, using the
> (possibly empty) 'node' attribute. The value of this attribute is
> referred to as NodeID, or Node Identifier.
> 
> I find it highly confusing to have optional part of a JID before the '@'
> also be called Node. As I don't feel like changing any protocol over
> this, could we possibly change the name of this JID part in 3920bis?

In http://xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/nodes.html we suggested changing
this to "local identifier". Another option is "localpart".

Peter

- --
Peter Saint-Andre
https://stpeter.im/

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (Darwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iEYEARECAAYFAko/sG8ACgkQNL8k5A2w/vzmJACgijXV5stiBQlY3Axsj5MK3aBn
unoAoIl/EGCWwH44I7vQtafE+AviiRhX
=y7bo
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----



More information about the Standards mailing list