[Standards] eventlogging xeps

Waqas Hussain waqas20 at gmail.com
Mon Dec 9 21:19:33 UTC 2013


On Mon, Dec 9, 2013 at 4:04 PM, Waqas Hussain <waqas20 at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 2, 2013 at 9:58 AM, Peter Waher <Peter.Waher at clayster.com> wrote:
>> Hello Philipp
>>
>> Thanks for your input. I've updated the according to your comments, and attach a new version.
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Peter Waher
>>
>
> Hey Peter,
>
> Something which I don't think has been discussed: Encoding. I'm
> assuming syslog-to-xmpp bridging is something you wish to enable.
> Syslog does recommend UTF-8, but doesn't require it. Data can be
> non-UTF-8. Also, syslog messages can be truncated by bytes, which can
> lead to invalid UTF-8 at the end of a message (the spec specifically
> points this out). And lastly, syslog messages may contain a
> byte-order-mark (BOM) at the start of messages to specify encoding.
> Also, XML supports a subset of UTF-8, not all UTF-8 characters are
> allowed.
>
> What we probably want is some form of escaping to be specified in the
> spec. Perhaps as simple as: replace \ with \\ and replace any invalid
> XML bytes with \XX, XX being the byte in hex. BOMs should be removed
> if available, and data should be converted to UTF-8 if possible.
>
> One thing which looks awkward to me are the 'type' attributes in the
> 'tag' element. What's a use-case where specifying the data-type would
> help the receiver (particularly when this would generally be the same
> in every log message sent by the entity)? And while you are using
> 'xs:*', the 'xs' namespace isn't defined in the XML stream the stanza
> is in.
>
> --
> Waqas Hussain

Lance and I just had a little chat about the xs: prefix in the Prosody
chatroom (here's hoping the formatting comes out nicely):

Lance
4:07 waqas: is it required to have a namespace declared when using a
prefixed attribute *value*? I thought those values were literally
xs:*, just a hack to make unique registry values easier

waqas
4:08 Lance: Required? Arguably. Look at everywhere you see xs:* being
used. Schemas, SOAP, etc. It's always specified, and interpreted in
that context.
4:08 We could certainly define it to always be xs:* in the spec
4:08 But that's not normal

Lance
4:09 because it looks like the same pattern as 122
4:09 !xep 0122

HAL
4:09 Lance: XEP-0122: Data Forms Validation is Standards Track (Draft,
2004-09-22) See: http://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0122.html

waqas
4:10 Ah, that XEP specifically defines it as "    •    Start with
"xs:", and be one of the "built-in" datatypes defined in XML Schema
Part 2 [2]"

Lance
4:10 right, with a method to add new prefixes too

waqas
4:11 (which is unusual mind you, you have full freedom to use whatever
suffix you want in SOAP and XML Schema)
4:11 *prefix

waqas
4:11 Lance: Should I post this little chat to the list?

Lance
4:11 yeah

Lance
4:12 i'd say we'd make the eventlogging stuff reuse the types from 122
4:12 ah, which it does already
4:12 section 5.9 of whichever version this is that i'm looking at

waqas
4:12 That makes sense



More information about the Standards mailing list