[Standards] naming of top elements in IQs
kevin.smith at isode.com
Fri Feb 27 08:40:24 UTC 2015
On 27 Feb 2015, at 08:28, Hund, Johannes <johannes.hund at siemens.com> wrote:
> Would it make sense to give some guideline/convention on how to design the schema, e.g. to name the payload child of an IQ, when to use a different namespace etc.?
> It could potentially make things more uniform, thus additionally allowing helper functions in implementations and increase reuse?
I think that we’ve got a decade and a half of prototol that won’t comply with whatever guidelines we come up with, so I’m not sure how much it would help implementations, though, which would still have to look at both the element name and namespace to determine what the purpose is.
More information about the Standards