[Standards] length of time in ProtoXEP state

Dave Cridland dave at cridland.net
Thu Jun 22 21:23:35 UTC 2017


On 22 June 2017 at 21:49, Sam Whited <sam at samwhited.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 22, 2017 at 3:30 AM, Dave Cridland <dave at cridland.net> wrote:
>> If it really is the name, then let's call it "Stable".
>
> I actually do think that would be very helpful; I can't tell you how
> often random people I'm talking too say "we tried XMPP, but it didn't
> have the feature we wanted" and I say "sure it did, that's XEP-XXXX"
> and they reply "no, that was only draft, and we needed a working
> version right then". Some variation of that is a significant portion
> of conversations I end up having with random people who have tried
> XMPP.

Names are important, I agree. We picked Draft - I think, it was well
before my time - because that's what the IETF used. It's since ceased
to be used there; they go straight from Proposed Standard to Internet
Standard.

We could, equally well, go for the same, but if we're picking terms
because of their utility for marketing (and I don't think that's a bad
thing to do) then "Stable" seems the better option.

It might even be worth having "Unstable", or "Alpha", or something for
Experimental, but I'm not so sure about that. I'd rather imply
"Bleeding Edge" than "Broken".

Dave.


More information about the Standards mailing list