[Standards] XEP-0223: Clarification
daniel at gultsch.de
Tue May 16 17:07:47 UTC 2017
I also tripped over this today although in a slightly different
context. And my issues are more about publish-options from XEP-0060 in
general rather than XEP-0223 in particular.
My interpretation is as follows.
- publish-options can contain arbitrary form fields.
- If a certain form field is registered with the registry  all
server implementations MUST behave according to the specification in
- The description in  "Forms enabling publication with options;
each field must specify whether it defines METADATA to be attached to
the item, a per-item OVERRIDE of the node configuration, or a
PRECONDITION to be checked against the node configuration." is a hint
to other people who might want to register more form fields and NOT a
hint that should ever be displayed to the end user.
- Currently only "pubsub#access_model" is defined with the registrar.
So when the server supports publish-options and I set a publish option
of access_model=whitelist it is guaranteed that all servers will
reject the publication if the access_model is not whitelist
- The behavior of setting a publish-option of persist-items as we can
see in the examples of XEP-0223 is completely unspecified because it
hasn't been registered.
Is this interpretation correct?
2016-10-21 23:47 GMT+02:00 forenjunkie <forenjunkie at chello.at>:
> Maybe its just my impression but it seems there is not much Server support
> for this XEP
> Especially #publish-options is missing from a lot of servers.
> Missing as in the server is capable of it but does deliberately not publish
> that feature.
> What is the intention behind this option? is it still accurate and a MUST?
> Could someone explain in detail why this has to be set.
> best wishes
> Standards mailing list
> Info: https://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/standards
> Unsubscribe: Standards-unsubscribe at xmpp.org
More information about the Standards