[Standards] LAST CALL: XEP-0308 (Last Message Correction)

Philipp Hancke fippo at goodadvice.pages.de
Fri Aug 10 16:23:32 UTC 2012

since I'm halfway through anyway...

> 1. Is this specification needed to fill gaps in the XMPP protocol stack or to clarify an existing protocol?

Well, I think sending a message with s/airlock/window/ would be 
sufficient, but i'm rather old-fashioned :-)

> 2. Does the specification solve the problem stated in the introduction and requirements?

Piggybacking on the id seems like a dirty hack, but for the sake of 
traffic it's better than adding a new xml element to each message stanza.

> 3. Do you plan to implement this specification in your code? If not, why not?

server-dev, N/A

> 4. Do you have any security concerns related to this specification?

See my other messages.

> 5. Is the specification accurate and clearly written?

I would reorder the business rules in section 4 so that they deal with 
the topics in a less random order. Proposed order would be 1+4 (dealing 
with the id on the sender side), 5+6 (dealing with the sender) and 3+4 
last (dealing with the receiver).

The discovery examples in section 2 use a server jid which seems 
awkward, probably related to the text at the start of the section.

THIS PROTOXEP in the registrar considerations should have probably been 
replaced by XEP-0308 upon publication.

More information about the Standards mailing list