[Standards] XEP-0060: PubSub questions

Sergey Dobrov binary at jrudevels.org
Tue Mar 18 22:10:27 UTC 2014


On 16/03/2014 23:18, Christian Schudt wrote:
> Hi,
Hello Christian,

>
> I am implementing XEP-0060 and therefore working through the specification.
>
> A few things caught my attention and I'd like to hear your comments about it.
>
> 1. "6.5 Retrieve Items from a Node" vs "5.5 Discover Items for a Node" is a little bit unclear. Where's the difference really? I mean, if I want to get the items for a node, should I use 6.5. or 5.5? 6.5 seems to do the same but more complete (i.e. it also returns the item payload).
>
In 6.5 you retrieve items directly from node with payloads. With 5.5 you 
can instead just check which items are there.

> 2. The event namespace defines a "collection" element with a "associate" and "disassociate" element. These are nowhere defined or explained. Are they still needed?
>
check here: http://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0248.html

I am not sure though if it still needs to be in XEP-0060...

> 3. Why is there a "presence-subscription-required" error, if RFC 6120 already defines "subscription-required" stanza error?

this is the application protocol specific error. it should be used in 
conclusion with "not-authorized" error from the RFC. Check here: 
http://www.xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0060.html#subscriber-subscribe-error-presence

>
> 4. "max-nodes-exceeded" error is defined in XML Schema but not described anywhere. It is still used or is it deprecated?

Probably, it needs to be clarified but I believe that the meaning of it 
is obvious, is not it?

>
> 5. The 'node' attribute is missing in XML Schema for the "http://jabber.org/protocol/pubsub" namespace in the "configure" element.

I believe that it is not needed there. If you are considering the #215 
example, I believe that namespace there have to be #owner...

>
> 6. The "retrieve-default-sub" feature is missing in XML Schema (#errors) and in "16.3 Service Discovery Features"
>

yes, that's probably a problem.

Thank you for your attention of the problem. Unfortunately, XEP-0060 has 
a lot of problems and I hope that your letter will attract attention to it.

>
> Best regards,
> Christian
>





More information about the Standards mailing list