[Standards] XMPP Registrar: Registration policy

Peter Saint-Andre stpeter at stpeter.im
Mon Jan 2 23:53:54 UTC 2017

On 1/2/17 4:47 PM, Sam Whited wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 12:05 PM, Tobias Markmann
> <tmarkmann at googlemail.com> wrote:
>> You created the PR for a reason not? Was the reason invalidated now?
> It was something about the XEP-0045 PR recently that sparked it; no
> one was clear if the option should be defined in an XEP or just added
> to the registry, I think. In my opinion most things probably don't
> need an XEP, but things like MUC options probably do (there should be
> some normative text describing how the option works, what it does, and
> how you use it to prevent confusion and incompatible implementations).

Couldn't we do that through a PR against XEP-0045 and review by the 
appropriate parties, such as the author and (given that it's Draft) the 

You might be catching on to the fact that, having experienced more 
heavyweight standards processes (mostly IETF) up close for many years, 
I'm leery of adding more weight than necessary to ours... ;-)


More information about the Standards mailing list