[Standards] Stanza namespaces
dave at cridland.net
Wed Apr 28 17:06:46 UTC 2010
On Wed Apr 28 17:59:17 2010, Justin Karneges wrote:
> On Wednesday 28 April 2010 04:05:32 Dave Cridland wrote:
> > Besides which, it's really not that much effort on the part of the
> > server to translate between namespaces, surely?
> It's awkward usage of XML. I'd like to phase out such usages that
> people to react with "what were they thinking?". Standardizing on
> jabber:client for stanzas, regardless of the stream they are
> carried over, is
> the right move.
The stanzas aren't actually the problem - it's the <body> etc beneath
that are eyebrow-waggle-inducing.
But it's still just how things are.
> > That aside, we cannot get rid of either:
> Right, we can't. At best, we could have text saying that on s2s
> the jabber:server namespace MUST be supported and the jabber:client
> SHOULD be supported, with a note that almost all existing servers
> just jabber:server. In reality this will mean everyone will
> continue to use
> jabber:server and no real change would have happened, but I don't
> know what
> else to suggest.
Changes that result in nothing are certainly not worth doing - it'd
be at best a political change.
The fact is, all protocols have weird warts. XMPP's is this namespace
thing (at least, one of them - there are of course others). I could
cheerfully list warts for any other well-deployed protocol, and XMPP
really isn't as bad as most.
That doesn't mean it's fixable, and doesn't mean we can ignore it.
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