[Standards] XEP-0301 Fallback Mechanism of Determining Support (Accessibility)

Mark Rejhon markybox at gmail.com
Tue Jul 10 20:08:13 UTC 2012


On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 3:51 PM, Kevin Smith <kevin at kismith.co.uk> wrote:

> On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 7:34 PM, Mark Rejhon <markybox at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Oh wow -- This is a massive surprise for me.
> > *precedent* in a *Final* standard -- that allows bypassing disco!
>
> Before planning  too much based on the precedent that CSN sets, it's
> worth noting that the precedent in question is that there was a
> protocol that predates caps and used another signalling method, and
> that this was retrofitted with caps support once it was available in
> preference to the legacy method, which was only left in place to deal
> with existing clients that deployed with the legacy method.
>

I will re-evaluate XEP-0115 -- the one I think you're referring to?
I'm not yet convinced that it is sufficient (by itself) to satisfy all the
pre-requisites without using fallback mechanisms, but I will give it a
careful reading to run all required scenarios that many of us feels the
spec must be able to support.



> I'm still aiming to do a review of the XEP soon - I'll try to suggest
> appropriate text for bits that I suspect need it when I do.
>

Please. Thanks!   Keep in mind of the big laundry lists of suggestions
already submitted by others;

Thanks,
Mark Rejhon
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/attachments/20120710/9d8efc8d/attachment.html>


More information about the Standards mailing list