[Standards] Proposed XMPP Extension: HTTP File Upload

Sam Whited sam at samwhited.com
Thu Jul 30 00:29:25 UTC 2015


On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 11:19 AM, Dave Cridland <dave at cridland.net> wrote:
> I see your point, but I'd prefer to see client developers only have to
> implement one thing instead of several (and have to select which file
> transfer mechanism to use in different circumstances).

Client specs should pick the best spec for the job they're trying to
do, and the audience of the client; while I'm normally all about
having a single way to do something to reduce confusion, JFT and HTTP
Upload are completely orthogonal proposals, and the fact that one
already exists should not block work on the other.

HTTP Upload should be used when you want a file to be made available
somewhere to one or more people (maybe publically, maybe with
authentication), it's a "sharing" action, whereas JFT should be used
when you want a (potentially encrypted) file transfer to a single
recepient that should never be stored on an intermediary machine, eg.
the "sending" action.

—Sam


P.S. Aside: That being said, were I to write a client I'd almost
certainly prefer to use HTTP Upload exclusively. While Jingle is very
powerful, and is actually quite a nifty protocol, it spans many specs
and is way to complicated for a lazy developer like me to want to
implement, whereas HTTP file upload is almost trivial to implement.


-- 
Sam Whited
pub 4096R/54083AE104EA7AD3
https://blog.samwhited.com



More information about the Standards mailing list