[Standards] LAST CALL: XEP-0226 (Message Stanza Profiles)

Dave Cridland dave at cridland.net
Mon Nov 16 16:19:24 UTC 2009


On Mon Nov 16 15:56:18 2009, Fabio Forno wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 16, 2009 at 4:41 PM, Dave Cridland <dave at cridland.net>  
> wrote:
> 
> >> 1. Is this specification needed to fill gaps in the XMPP  
> protocol stack or
> >> to clarify an existing protocol?
> >
> > I'm going to be forced to assume that the answer here is "No",  
> given that
> > there's been no response to the Last Call at all.
> 
> Indeed I sent a first attempt of review to the techreview list.

Ooops. I seem to not be on that.

> Basically it was positive (yes to 1,2,3, no to 4), I just think it
> doesn't state well real purpose (or at least what I find useful):  
> the
> problem is not having overcomplicated stanzas to handle, but having
> some well defined method to understand which part of the message is
> the real payload, and which part is just a fallback (usually a body
> explaining why something has failed)

Right. I also think a primary purpose of this document is, or should  
be, some definitions of what these things are - so we know that we  
can say that a XEP-0258 security label is a "Metadata element, as  
defined in XEP-0226", or something - XEP-0258 almost does this, but  
making this more stable and explicit would seem sensible.

Dave.
-- 
Dave Cridland - mailto:dave at cridland.net - xmpp:dwd at dave.cridland.net
  - acap://acap.dave.cridland.net/byowner/user/dwd/bookmarks/
  - http://dave.cridland.net/
Infotrope Polymer - ACAP, IMAP, ESMTP, and Lemonade



More information about the Standards mailing list