[Standards] Proposed XMPP Extension: Multi-User Chat Light

Stefan Strigler stefan.strigler at gmail.com
Mon Dec 14 17:08:55 UTC 2015


2015-12-14 16:16 GMT+00:00 Dave Cridland <dave at cridland.net>:

>
>
> No, you cannot have an arbitrary XEP-0045 service also presented over this
> protocol; it has to be a cut-down, especially written service. The result
> is that existing '45 features are lost entirely.
>

The service identifies itself as

 <feature var='urn:xmpp:muclight:0'/>

over disco-info. Not sure where any confusion could come up here.



> Mobile-friendly is fine, mobile-only is not.
>

It is not mobile only, there is absolutely nothing that would prevent a
desktop client from implementing that protocol.


>
> The point of XMPP is extensibility - by blocking off extensibility because
> you don't think the existing cases are important enough, you're also
> blocking off use-cases none of us have thought of.
>

The intention of this proposal is to resemble functionality that's present
in competing products like Whatsapp et al at a level that's as simple as
possible to implement, esp when focusing on clients. Mobile clients, sure.
It is by no means undermining the extensibility of XMPP, all it does is
exposing a reduced set of functionality as found in MUC over its own new(!)
namespace while reusing parts of things found in MUC for ease of
implementation.

It is not meant as a replacement for MUC, nor is it meant to block or stop
any other efforts to come to a more generalized solution to the same
problem. But it is an ad-hoc approach that solves a problem right now. At
the protocol level as implementation wise (since we have one for
MongooseIM). It documents what we actually do. And I don't see where it
does any harm (because it sounds so at times).


Cheers,

Stefan
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/attachments/20151214/18dae7b8/attachment.html>


More information about the Standards mailing list