[Standards] Namespace versioning
dave at cridland.net
Thu May 19 11:43:56 UTC 2011
On Thu May 19 08:24:43 2011, Jacek Konieczny wrote:
> Yes. It is wrong before <dialback
> is a totally different element than <dialback
> xmlns='urn:xmpp:features:dialback' />.
> It is not a new version, it is a new protocol. And a new namespace.
> would we want that?
> That is the always returning problem with XMPP protocols –
> treating the
> namespace like an attribute. It is not an attribute, it is a part of
> element name. '<a xmlns="a"/>' is different from '<a xmlns="b"/>'
> same way '<a/>' is different from '<b/>'. Namespaces give us
> availability to use e.g. '<error/>' element in different protocols
> in a
> different way, for a different purpose. They should not be used to
> extra meaning to an existing element.
Since I think this'd be the third time this month I'd try to explain
namespace versioning, please just read the attached. FWIW, the vast
majority of people working on XMPP (including I might add everyone
contributing to this thread, as far as I know) do understand XML
namespaces. The way we allocate namespaces is, however, fairly
confusing when you see it and I don't blame you for (apparently)
Also, Peter, Oh Mighty XEP Editor, I apologise for its rough form,
but hereby submit it as an Informational XEP to provide background
reading for, and expansion on, XEP-0053§4. I beseech thee, as well
as those nice chaps on the Council, to help me clear it up a bit, too.
Dave Cridland - mailto:dave at cridland.net - xmpp:dwd at dave.cridland.net
Infotrope Polymer - ACAP, IMAP, ESMTP, and Lemonade
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 6108 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the Standards