[Standards] long specs

Peter Saint-Andre stpeter at stpeter.im
Tue Feb 28 20:24:10 UTC 2012


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

On 2/27/12 4:02 PM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
> On 2/15/12 1:07 PM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
>> On 2/15/12 12:48 PM, Kurt Zeilenga wrote:
> 
>>> On Feb 15, 2012, at 8:26 AM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
> 
>>>> I'd be willing to work on this, but I want to make sure that
>>>>  people think there's value in doing so.
> 
>>> Personally, I not sure what I hate more, overly long documents 
>>> or specifications unnecessarily split over multiple documents.
> 
>>> I don't consider XEP 45 or XEP 60 to be overly long.
> 
>> Half the feedback I receive is (a) it's too hard to read a long 
>> spec. The other half is (b) it's too hard to read multiple
>> specs. For XEP-0060, the feedback is heavily weighted toward (a).
>> For XEP-0045, it's about evenly weighted. My conclusion is that
>> we really need to split up XEP-0060, and that splitting XEP-0045
>> into user vs. admin use cases would be helpful.
> 
> Over the weekend I took a rough cut at splitting up XEP-0045.
> Here's what I came up with (page lengths are based on print-to-PDF
> in Firefox):
> 
> XEP-0045 = 141 pages
> 
> Architecture, Requirements, Discovery, Security = 35 pages
> 
> Occupant Use Cases = 56 pages
> 
> Administration = 68 pages

Because more than one person has asked about the split files, I've
placed them here:

http://www.saint-andre.com/jabber/tmp/muc-arch.html

http://www.saint-andre.com/jabber/tmp/muc-occupant.html

http://www.saint-andre.com/jabber/tmp/muc-admin.html

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/

iEYEARECAAYFAk9NN+oACgkQNL8k5A2w/vwYKACgkVYFy00xLTlppsW/KJl0yk8u
lc0AoNe44vM9zidMpipzOho74jncGE4N
=Ia5C
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----



More information about the Standards mailing list