[Standards] XEP-0301 0.5 comments [Sections 1 through 5]

Peter Saint-Andre stpeter at stpeter.im
Tue Jul 31 23:56:24 UTC 2012


On 7/27/12 8:19 AM, Mark Rejhon wrote:

>>>> "The event attribute MAY be omitted from the <rtt/> element during
>>>> regular real-time text transmission" - what is the the alternative
>>>> you're allowing clients, and what is "regular real-time text
>>>> transmission"?
>>>
>>> [Change made]
>>> Clarification made: "The event attribute is NOT required for <rtt/> when
>>> transmitting changes to an existing real-time message."
>>
>> I'm not fond of either MAY or not required here - it seems like the
>> behaviour isn't optional in any way, but firmly defined depending on
>> the content of the stanza. It's not immediately clear to me what the
>> right wording is, but it seems like it should be tighter.
> 
> [Comment]
> (c/NOT required/NOT REQUIRED/)
> Basic Real-Time Text allows you to transmit message changes via
> Message Reset, so there are situations where you're always using an
> 'event' attribute for all <rtt/> elements.
> How can the wording be tweaked, so that circumstance is accomodated for?

There's no such thing as NOT REQUIRED in RFC 2119. I suggest changing it
to "The event attribute is not necessary..."

Peter

-- 
Peter Saint-Andre
https://stpeter.im/





More information about the Standards mailing list